Rashi on Parshas Terumah – Commentary

Introduction to Rashi on Parshas Terumah

Rashi approaches Parshas Terumah as a precise and sacred blueprint for the dwelling place of the Shechinah among Israel. His commentary carefully explains each material, measurement, and structural detail of the Mishkan and its vessels, revealing that nothing in the command is incidental. Every dimension, ornament, and arrangement carries meaning—linguistic, symbolic, or halachic. Through the teachings of Chazal, Rashi shows that the Mishkan was not merely a structure, but a spiritual system designed according to a Divine pattern, with each element reflecting holiness, order, and purpose.

Chapter 25

25:2 — “דַּבֵּר אֶל־בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְיִקְחוּ־לִי תְּרוּמָה”

“And let them take for Me an offering.”

Rashi explains that the word “לִי” (“for Me”) means “לִשְׁמִי” — for the sake of My Name. The offering is not simply a donation of materials, but an act dedicated to the honor of Hashem (Midrash Tanchuma, Terumah 1).

The word “תרומה” means something set apart or separated. The command is that the people should set aside from their possessions a voluntary gift in honor of Hashem.

The phrase “ידבנו לבו” refers to a voluntary offering. The root of the word is the same as “נדבה,” and it denotes goodwill or willing-hearted generosity. Rashi notes its linguistic meaning as an expression of good will.

On the phrase “תקחו את תרומתי,” Rashi cites Chazal, who teach that the word “תרומה” appears three times here, alluding to three separate offerings:

• The half-shekel offering used to make the sockets of the Mishkan (שמות ל״ח:כ״ה–כ״ז).
• The half-shekel collected for the communal sacrifices.
• The voluntary offering for the construction of the Mishkan itself (ירושלמי שקלים א:א).

Rashi adds that the thirteen materials listed in the section were all necessary either for the construction of the Mishkan or for the garments of the Kohanim.

25:3 — “וְזֹאת הַתְּרוּמָה”

“And this is the offering…”

Rashi explains that the materials such as gold, silver, and copper were all brought as voluntary gifts, each person giving according to the prompting of his heart.

However, the silver differed. That silver was given equally by all, in the form of the half-shekel contribution. Rashi notes that no additional silver was needed for the Mishkan beyond that amount, since the silver of the census was used for the sockets and hooks (שמות ל״ח:כ״ה–כ״ח).

Any additional silver brought as a voluntary donation was used to make the holy vessels.

25:4 — “וּתְכֵלֶת וְאַרְגָּמָן…”

“And blue, and purple…”

Rashi explains the materials listed:

• תכלת — wool dyed with the blood of the חלזון, producing a greenish-blue color (מנחות מ״ד).
• ארגמן — wool dyed with a specific red-purple dye called argaman.
• שש — linen (יבמות ד׳).
• עזים — goats’ hair. Onkelos translates this as something derived from goats, not the goats themselves.

25:5 — “וְעֹרֹת אֵילִם מְאָדָּמִים…”

“And rams’ skins dyed red…”

Rashi explains:

• The rams’ skins were dyed red after being processed.
• תחשים — a type of animal that existed only at that time. It was multicolored, and therefore the Targum calls it “ססגונא,” because it rejoiced and gloried in its colors (שבת כ״ח; תנחומא תרומה ו).

On “ועצי שטים” (shittim wood), Rashi asks: Where did they obtain such wood in the wilderness?

He answers, citing Rabbi Tanchuma, that Yaakov Avinu foresaw through Ruach HaKodesh that the Jewish people would build a Mishkan in the desert. He brought cedar trees to Egypt, planted them there, and instructed his children to take them when they left Egypt (תנחומא תרומה ט; בראשית רבה צ״ד).

25:6 — “שֶׁמֶן לַמָּאֹר…”

“Oil for the light…”

Rashi explains:

• The oil was pure olive oil used to keep the lamp burning continually.
• The spices for the anointing oil were used to anoint the Mishkan and its vessels, thereby sanctifying them, as described later in Parshas Ki Sisa (שמות ל׳:כ״ג).
• The incense spices were burned every morning and evening, as described in Parshas Tetzaveh (שמות ל׳:ז׳).
• The word קטרת refers to the rising vapor or column of smoke.

25:7 — “אַבְנֵי שֹׁהַם…”

“Onyx stones…”

Rashi explains:

• Two onyx stones were required for the ephod (שמות כ״ח:ו׳).
• The “stones for setting” were so called because they were placed into gold settings shaped like indentations.
• The term “משבצת” refers to the hollow setting itself.

Regarding “לאפד ולחשן,” Rashi clarifies:

• The onyx stones were for the ephod.
• The filling stones were for the breastplate.
• Both are described in Parshas Tetzaveh and were ornamental garments worn by the Kohen Gadol.

25:8 — “וְעָשׂוּ לִי מִקְדָּשׁ”

“And let them make Me a sanctuary…”

Rashi explains that this means: let them make, for the sake of My Name, a house of holiness.

25:9 — “כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מַרְאֶה אוֹתְךָ”

“According to all that I show you…”

Rashi explains that this verse is connected to the previous one:

“Let them make Me a sanctuary… according to all that I am showing you.”

The phrase “ושכנתי בתוכם” is understood as a parenthetical insertion.

On the words “וכן תעשו,” Rashi explains that this instruction applies not only to the Mishkan but also to future generations.

If one of the vessels is lost, or when vessels are made for the Beis HaMikdash—such as those built by Shlomo—they must follow the same pattern. This interpretation is supported by the wording “וכן תעשו” (סנהדרין ט״ז).

25:10 — “וְעָשׂוּ אֲרוֹן”

“And they shall make an Ark…”

Rashi explains that the word “ארון” refers to a box-like chest without legs, similar to storage chests known in his time. It rested directly on its base, like a chest or case.

25:11 — “מִבַּיִת וּמִחוּץ תְּצַפֶּנּוּ”

“Within and without shall you overlay it.”

Rashi explains that Betzalel made three arks: two of gold and one of wood. Each had four sides and a base, but was open at the top. He placed the wooden ark inside a larger golden one, and a smaller golden ark inside the wooden one. He then covered the upper rim of the wooden ark with gold. As a result, the ark was overlaid with gold both inside and outside (יומא ע״ב; ירושלמי שקלים ו:א).

On the words “זר זהב” (a golden crown), Rashi explains that this was a crown-like border surrounding the ark above its rim. The outer golden ark was made higher than the inner ones so that it rose slightly above the thickness of the cover. When the cover was placed on top, this golden border extended a little above it. This crown symbolized the “crown of the Torah,” which was placed within the ark (שמות רבה ל״ד).

25:12 — “וְיָצַקְתָּ לוֹ אַרְבַּע טַבְּעֹת זָהָב”

“And you shall cast for it four rings of gold…”

Rashi explains that “ויצקת” refers to casting metal, as in the Targum.

The word “פעמותיו” refers to its corners. The rings were placed on the upper corners near the cover: two on one side and two on the other, along the width of the ark. The staves were inserted into these rings. The ark’s length created a space of two and a half cubits between the staves so that two men carrying the ark could walk comfortably between them. This is explained in Menachos (צ״ח).

Regarding the phrase “ושתי טבעת על צלעו האחת,” Rashi explains that these are the same four rings mentioned earlier. The verse is clarifying their placement. The letter ו in “ושתי” is technically extra, and the phrase should be understood as though it read “שתי טבעת.” Alternatively, it may be interpreted as “and two of these rings shall be on the one side.”

“צלעו” simply means “its side.”

25:13 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ בַדֵּי עֲצֵי שִׁטִּים”

“And you shall make staves of shittim wood.”

Rashi explains that the word “בדי” means staves or poles.

25:15 — “לֹא יָסֻרוּ מִמֶּנּוּ”

“They shall not depart from it.”

Rashi explains that this means the staves were never to be removed, ever (יומא ע״ב).

25:16 — “וְנָתַתָּ אֶל הָאָרֹן אֶת הָעֵדֻת”

“And you shall place into the ark the testimony…”

Rashi explains that the phrase should be understood as though it read “בארון” — “into the ark.”

“The testimony” refers to the Torah, the Tablets, which serve as a testimony between Hashem and the Jewish people that He commanded them the mitzvos written in it (תנחומא פקודי ד׳).

25:17 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ כַפֹּרֶת זָהָב טָהוֹר”

“And you shall make a cover of pure gold…”

Rashi explains that the kapores was a cover placed over the ark, which was open at the top. It lay flat over it like a slab.

Its length and width matched those of the ark, resting upon the thickness of the four walls. Although the Torah does not specify its thickness, the Sages explain that it was one handbreadth thick (סוכה ה׳).

25:18 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ שְׁנַיִם כְּרֻבִים”

“And you shall make two cherubim…”

Rashi explains that the cherubim had the faces of children (סוכה ה׳).

On the phrase “מקשה תעשה,” he explains that they were to be made of one piece with the cover, not created separately and then attached. One was to take a large mass of gold, hammer it from the center, and shape the protruding edges into the forms of the cherubim. This was unlike the work of goldsmiths who solder pieces together.

The word “מקשה” refers to beaten work.

“קצות הכפרת” refers to the ends of the cover.

25:19 — “וַעֲשֵׂה כְרוּב אֶחָד מִקָּצָה”

“And make one cherub from one end…”

Rashi explains that this phrase clarifies that there was one cherub at each end, not two on each side.

“מן הכפרת” means that the cherubim were to be made from the cover itself, not separately and then attached. This explains again the meaning of “מקשה תעשה אותם.”

25:20 — “וְהָיוּ הַכְּרֻבִים פֹּרְשֵׂי כְנָפַיִם”

“And the cherubim shall spread their wings…”

Rashi explains that their wings were not to lie flat, but to be spread upward near their heads. The space between the wings and the cover was to measure ten handbreadths, as explained in Sukkah.

25:21 — “וְאֶל הָאָרֹן תִּתֵּן אֶת הָעֵדֻת”

“And into the ark you shall place the testimony…”

Rashi notes that this appears to repeat what was already said in verse 16. He explains that it teaches the order: while the ark was still alone, without the cover, the testimony was first placed inside it. Only afterward was the cover placed on top. This is confirmed by the account of the erection of the Mishkan (שמות מ׳:כ׳).

25:22 — “וְנוֹעַדְתִּי לְךָ שָׁם”

“And I will meet with you there…”

Rashi explains that this means that whenever Hashem would designate a meeting place to speak with Moshe, it would be at that spot.

On the phrase “ודברתי אתך מעל הכפרת,” Rashi notes an apparent contradiction. One verse says that Hashem spoke from above the kapores, while another states that He spoke from the Tent of Meeting (ויקרא א׳:א׳).

A third verse resolves the contradiction: “ובבא משה אל אהל מועד… וישמע את הקול מדבר אליו מעל הכפרת” (במדבר ז׳:פ״ט). Moshe would enter the Mishkan, and once he passed the entrance, a voice descended from heaven to the space between the cherubim. From there it emerged and was heard by Moshe in the Tent of Meeting (ספרי).

On the phrase “ואת כל אשר אצוה אותך אל בני ישראל,” Rashi explains that the letter ו is superfluous. If one wishes, it may be interpreted as: “and that which I speak to you there will be everything I command you concerning the children of Israel.”

25:23 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ שֻׁלְחָן”

“And you shall make a table…”

Rashi explains that the phrase “קמתו” refers to the total height of the table, meaning the height of its legs together with the thickness of the tabletop.

25:24 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ לוֹ זֵר זָהָב”

“And you shall make for it a golden border…”

Rashi explains that this golden border symbolized the “crown of kingship.” The table represents wealth and greatness, as people refer to a lavish household as having a “royal table.”

25:25 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ לוֹ מִסְגֶּרֶת”

“And you shall make for it a rim…”

Rashi explains that the word “מסגרת” means a rim or frame, as translated by the Targum.

The Sages disagreed about its exact placement:

• Some held that it was on top, surrounding the table like the raised edge on the tables of noblemen.
• Others held that it was fixed below, connecting the legs of the table on all four sides, with the tabletop resting upon it (מנחות צ״ו; סוכה ה׳).

On the phrase “ועשית זר זהב למסגרתו,” Rashi explains that this refers to the same golden border mentioned previously. Here the Torah clarifies that the border was attached to the rim.

25:27 — “לְעֻמַּת הַמִּסְגֶּרֶת תִּהְיֶיןָ הַטַּבָּעֹת”

“Over against the rim shall the rings be…”

Rashi explains that the rings were inserted into the legs of the table, opposite the extremities of the rim.

On the words “לבתים לבדים,” he explains that these rings served as receptacles in which the staves were placed.

The term “לבתים” means “for the purpose of being receptacles,” as translated by the Targum.

25:28 — “וְנִשָּׂא בָם”

“And it shall be borne with them…”

Rashi explains that “ונשא” is in the passive (Niphal) form, meaning that the table was to be carried by means of the staves.

25:29 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ קְּעָרֹתָיו וְכַפֹּתָיו…”

“And you shall make its dishes and its spoons…”

Rashi explains the utensils of the table:

“קערתיו” were molds shaped like the loaves. The bread itself was formed like a box open on two opposite sides, with a base below and its ends folded upward like walls. Because it had surfaces facing both directions, it was called “לחם הפנים” — bread with “faces.”

The loaves were placed lengthwise across the table, with their sides upright at the edges. There were two molds: an iron one used for baking, and a golden one in which the bread was placed after baking until the next Shabbos, when it was arranged on the table. This golden mold is called “קערה.”

“וכפתיו” refers to ladle-like vessels with flat bottoms used to hold the frankincense. There were two of them, for the two handfuls of frankincense placed on the two piles of bread (ויקרא כ״ד:ז׳).

“וקשותיו” were shaped like halves of hollow canes, split lengthwise. Three were placed above each loaf so that the next loaf rested upon them. These separated the loaves, allowing air to circulate so they would not become moldy (מנחות צ״ו–צ״ז).

“ומנקיותיו” are translated by Onkelos as supports. According to this explanation, they were like golden pegs or pillars standing on the ground and rising above the table to the height of the stacks of bread. They had five notches, one above another, into which the ends of the canes rested. This prevented the weight of the upper loaves from crushing the lower ones.

Rashi notes another opinion among the Sages:

• “קשותיו” were the supports, called so because they strengthened the loaves.
• “מנקיותיו” were the canes, which kept the loaves from molding.

However, Onkelos followed the opinion that “מנקיותיו” were the supporting pillars.

On the phrase “אשר יסך בהן,” Rashi explains that it refers to the canes. They covered the loaves like a screen or roof. The term “יסך” means covering or screening, as in במדבר ד׳:ז׳.

25:30 — “וְנָתַתָּ עַל הַשֻּׁלְחָן לֶחֶם פָּנִים”

“And you shall place on the table the showbread…”

Rashi explains that it is called “לחם הפנים” because it had “faces,” as previously described. The number of loaves and their arrangement are explained later in Parshas Emor (ויקרא כ״ד:ה׳–ט׳).

25:31 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ מְנֹרַת זָהָב טָהוֹר”

“And you shall make a menorah of pure gold…”

Rashi explains that “מקשה תיעשה המנורה” means the menorah was to be made from a single piece of gold. One was not to construct it from separate parts and then solder them together. Rather, the craftsman would hammer the gold and shape the branches from the single mass.

The term “מקשה” refers to hammered work, the parts being drawn out from the central mass by blows of the hammer.

The passive form “תיעשה” implies that the menorah would be made “by itself.” Since Moshe found its construction difficult, Hashem told him to throw the gold into the fire, and it would form on its own (תנחומא בהעלותך ג׳).

“ירכה” refers to the base of the menorah, shaped like a box with three legs extending beneath it.

“וקנה” refers to the central shaft rising upward from the base. On it sat the central lamp, shaped like a cup to hold the oil and wick.

“גביעיה” were goblet-shaped ornaments, long and slender, projecting from each branch. They served purely as decoration.

“כפתריה” were round, apple-shaped knobs projecting around the central shaft, like ornamental knobs on royal candlesticks. The Torah specifies their number and placement.

“ופרחיה” were decorative flower-like designs.

The phrase “ממנה יהיו” teaches that all parts were to emerge from the single block of gold, not made separately and attached afterward.

25:32 — “וְשִׁשָּׁה קָנִים יֹצְאִים מִצִּדֶּיהָ”

“And six branches shall go out of its sides…”

Rashi explains that the branches extended diagonally from the central shaft, rising upward until their tops were level with the height of the middle branch. They emerged from the central shaft one above another: the lowest branch was the longest, the one above it was shorter, and the highest was the shortest. This arrangement ensured that the tops of all branches reached the same height as the central shaft.

25:33 — “שְׁלֹשָׁה גְבִעִים מְשֻׁקָּדִים…”

“Three goblets shaped like almonds…”

Rashi explains that the word “משקדים” means that the goblets were engraved or chased in the style used for gold and silver vessels.

Each branch had three projecting goblets, along with a knob and a flower.

25:34 — “וּבַמְּנֹרָה אַרְבָּעָה גְבִעִים…”

“And in the menorah, four goblets…”

Rashi explains that on the body of the central shaft there were four goblets: one below the branches and three above the points where the side branches emerged.

On the phrase “משקדים כפתריה ופרחיה,” Rashi notes that this is one of five verses in the Torah whose grammatical structure is uncertain. It is unclear whether the word “משקדים” describes the goblets alone, or the knobs and flowers as well (יומא נ״ב).

25:35 — “וְכַפְתֹּר תַּחַת שְׁנֵי הַקָּנִים…”

“And a knob under two branches…”

Rashi explains that the branches emerged from the sides of the knobs, extending upward. He then cites the tradition describing the menorah’s full structure:

The total height of the menorah was eighteen handbreadths.

• The base and its flower occupied three handbreadths.
• Two handbreadths were plain.
• One handbreadth contained a goblet, a knob, and a flower.
• Two handbreadths were plain.
• One handbreadth contained a knob from which two branches emerged.
• One handbreadth plain.
• One handbreadth with another knob and two branches.
• One handbreadth plain.
• One handbreadth with another knob and two branches.
• Two handbreadths plain.
• The top three handbreadths contained three goblets, a knob, and a flower.

From this calculation:

• There were twenty-two goblets: eighteen on the six branches (three per branch) and four on the central shaft.
• There were eleven knobs: six on the branches, three on the central shaft where branches emerged, and two additional knobs on the shaft.
• There were nine flowers: six on the branches and three on the central shaft.

This structure is derived from the baraisa on the construction of the Mishkan (מנחות כ״ח).

25:37 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ אֶת נֵרֹתֶיהָ…”

“And you shall make its lamps…”

Rashi explains that the lamps were small bowl-like vessels into which the oil and wicks were placed.

On the phrase “והאיר על עבר פניה,” he explains that the six lamps on the branches were turned toward the central shaft. When lit, their light was directed toward the face of the central branch, illuminating it.

25:38 — “וּמַלְקָחֶיהָ וּמַחְתֹּתֶיהָ…”

“And its tongs and its snuff-dishes…”

Rashi explains:

• “מלקחיה” were tongs used to adjust and remove the wicks.
• “מחתתיה” were small bowls used to collect the ashes each morning when the lamps were cleaned of the burnt wick remains.

25:39 — “כִּכַּר זָהָב טָהוֹר”

“Of a talent of pure gold…”

Rashi explains that the entire menorah, together with all its vessels, had to weigh exactly one talent—no more and no less (מנחות פ״ח).

He describes the measurement: a common talent was sixty manehs, but the sacred talent was double that amount, one hundred twenty manehs.

25:40 — “וּרְאֵה וַעֲשֵׂה”

“And see and make…”

Rashi explains that Hashem showed Moshe the pattern of the menorah on the mountain. This teaches that Moshe found the menorah’s construction difficult until Hashem showed him a menorah of fire as a model (מנחות כ״ט).

On the phrase “אשר אתה מראה,” Rashi explains the grammar: it means “which you are shown,” not “which you show.” The vowelization indicates a passive meaning—that others show it to you.

Chapter 25 Summary

In Chapter 25, Rashi explains the voluntary offerings of Israel and the sacred intention behind them, emphasizing that the donations were to be given for the sake of Hashem’s Name. He details the materials of the Mishkan and their origins, including traditions about the shittim wood and the special creatures used for coverings. Rashi then carefully describes the construction and symbolism of the Ark, the Kapores, the Cherubim, the Table, and the Menorah. Through these explanations, he reveals both the physical structure and the spiritual meaning of the Mishkan’s central vessels, including the crowns of Torah, kingship, and priesthood represented by their golden borders.

Chapter 26

26:1 — “וְאֶת הַמִּשְׁכָּן תַּעֲשֶׂה עֶשֶׂר יְרִיעֹת”

“And you shall make the Mishkan of ten curtains…”

Rashi explains that these ten curtains served as the roof of the Mishkan and also as coverings for the outer sides of the boards. The curtains hung behind the boards in order to cover them.

On the phrase “שש משזר ותכלת וארגמן ותולעת שני,” Rashi explains that each thread consisted of four materials combined together: one strand of linen and three strands of wool (blue, purple, and crimson). Each strand was itself made of six threads. Thus, when the four materials were twisted together, each finished thread was composed of twenty-four strands (יומא ע״א).

On the words “כרבים מעשה חשב,” Rashi explains that the cherubim were woven directly into the fabric, not embroidered afterward with a needle. The designs appeared on both sides of the curtain, with different images on each side—such as a lion on one side and an eagle on the other—similar to finely woven silk belts.

26:3 — “חֲמֵשׁ הַיְרִיעֹת תִּהְיֶיןָ חֹבְרֹת”

“Five curtains shall be joined together…”

Rashi explains that the five curtains were sewn together with a needle into one section, and the other five were sewn together into a second section.

On the phrase “אשה אל אחתה,” Rashi notes that this is the usual biblical expression when referring to objects of feminine grammatical gender being joined together. When the objects are masculine, the Torah uses the expression “איש אל אחיו.”

26:4 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ לֻלָּאֹת”

“And you shall make loops…”

Rashi explains that “ללאת” are loops or laces, as rendered by the Targum.

On the phrase “מקצה בחברת,” he explains that the loops were placed on the curtain at the end of the joined section. The group of five curtains was called a “חוברת,” a joined unit.

Similarly, the loops were to be made on the outermost curtain of the second joined section.

26:5 — “מַקְבִּילֹת הַלֻּלָּאֹת”

“The loops shall correspond…”

Rashi explains that the loops had to be measured and placed exactly opposite one another. The spacing between the loops on one curtain had to match the spacing on the other, so that when the two sections were laid together, the loops would align precisely.

He then provides a detailed explanation of the measurements of the curtains and how they covered the Mishkan:

• Each curtain was twenty-eight cubits long and four cubits wide.
• Five joined together formed a width of twenty cubits, and the other five formed another twenty-cubit section.
• The Mishkan’s length was thirty cubits from east to west.
• Its width from north to south was ten cubits.

The curtains were laid across the width of the Mishkan:

• Ten cubits covered the roof interior.
• One cubit on each side covered the thickness of the boards.
• Eight cubits hung down on each side, covering most of the boards’ height.
• The bottom two cubits of the boards remained exposed.

Along the length:

• Thirty cubits covered the interior roof.
• One cubit covered the thickness of the western boards.
• One cubit covered the thickness of the eastern pillars.
• Eight cubits hung down the back (west side) of the Mishkan, leaving the bottom two cubits exposed.

Rashi cites an alternate opinion in Tractate Shabbos, which holds that the curtains did not cover the eastern pillars. According to that view, nine cubits hung down the back. The verse about the paroches supports this interpretation.

26:6 — “קַרְסֵי זָהָב”

“Catches of gold…”

Rashi explains that these were hooks. One end was inserted into the loops of one section, and the other end into the loops of the second section, thereby joining the two parts of the curtain.

26:7 — “יְרִיעֹת עִזִּים”

“Curtains of goats’ hair…”

Rashi explains that these were made from goats’ hair.

On the phrase “לאהל על המשכן,” he explains that these curtains served as an upper covering spread over the lower curtains.

26:8 — “שְׁלֹשִׁים בָּאַמָּה”

“Thirty cubits…”

Rashi explains that these upper curtains were two cubits longer than the lower ones. When laid over the Mishkan in the same manner, they extended an extra cubit on each side. This covered one of the two cubits of boards that had previously been exposed.

The lowest cubit of each board remained uncovered because it was inserted into the socket, and the sockets themselves were one cubit high.

26:9 — “וְכָפַלְתָּ אֶת הַיְרִיעָה הַשִּׁשִּׁית”

“And you shall double the sixth curtain…”

Rashi explains that this refers to the extra curtain in the upper set, since the goats’-hair curtains were eleven, while the lower set was ten.

On the phrase “אל מול פני האהל,” he explains that half of this curtain hung doubled over the entrance on the east side, in front of the screen. The Mishkan thus resembled a modest bride with her face covered by a veil.

26:12 — “וְסֶרַח הָעֹדֵף”

“And the surplus of the curtains…”

Rashi explains that the “curtains of the tent” refers to the upper goats’-hair curtains, which served as a covering over the lower ones.

These upper curtains exceeded the lower ones by half a curtain at the western end. Since half of the extra curtain was doubled over the entrance, the remaining two cubits extended beyond the lower curtains.

On the phrase “תסרח על אחרי המשכן,” Rashi explains that these extra cubits hung over the back of the Mishkan, covering the two cubits of boards that had been left exposed.

“Acharei ha-Mishkan” refers to the west side, which is called the back because the entrance faced east. The north and south sides are therefore referred to as the right and left sides.

26:13 — “וְהָאַמָּה מִזֶּה וְהָאַמָּה מִזֶּה”

“And a cubit on this side and a cubit on that side…”

Rashi explains that this refers to the north and south sides. The extra cubit on each side came from the surplus length of the goats’-hair curtains, which exceeded the length of the lower curtains by two cubits.

On the phrase “יהיה סרוח על צדי המשכן,” Rashi explains that this surplus hung down over the sides of the Mishkan on the north and south. From this, the Torah teaches a moral lesson: a person should take care of beautiful objects. The finer, inner curtains were protected by the coarser outer coverings (ילקוט שמעוני).

26:14 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ מִכְסֶה לָאֹהֶל”

“And you shall make a covering for the tent…”

Rashi explains that above the goats’-hair curtains there was another covering of rams’ skins dyed red, and above that a covering of tachash skins. These upper coverings covered only the roof and did not hang down the sides. Their length was thirty cubits and their width ten cubits. This is the opinion of Rabbi Nechemiah.

According to Rabbi Yehudah, there was only one covering, composed half of rams’ skins dyed red and half of tachash skins (שבת כ״ח).

26:15 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ אֶת הַקְּרָשִׁים”

“And you shall make the boards…”

Rashi notes that the verse uses the phrase “the boards,” implying that these were already designated. He explains that Yaakov Avinu planted cedar trees in Egypt and instructed his sons to bring them with them when they left, telling them that Hashem would one day command them to build a Mishkan from shittim wood. Thus, the boards were already prepared for this sacred purpose.

On the phrase “עצי שטים עומדים,” Rashi explains that the boards were to stand upright. The walls were not to be constructed by laying boards horizontally, but by placing them vertically, with their length forming the height of the walls.

26:16 — “עֶשֶׂר אַמּוֹת אֹרֶךְ הַקֶּרֶשׁ”

“Ten cubits shall be the length of a board…”

Rashi explains that this teaches that the height of the Mishkan was ten cubits, since the boards stood upright.

On the phrase “ואַמָּה וַחֲצִי הָאַמָּה רֹחַב,” he explains that this measurement allows us to calculate the length of the Mishkan: twenty boards on the north and south sides, each one and a half cubits wide, produced a total length of thirty cubits from east to west.

26:17 — “שְׁתֵּי יָדוֹת לַקֶּרֶשׁ הָאֶחָד”

“Two tenons for each board…”

Rashi explains that the lower part of each board was cut in the middle to a height of one cubit, leaving a quarter of the width on each side. These remaining sections formed the two tenons.

The tenons were inserted into hollow sockets, each one cubit high. Forty sockets were placed in a row, close together.

The tenons were cut away on three sides so that the board would cover the entire top of the socket. Otherwise, there would have been a gap between adjacent boards equal to the thickness of the rims of two sockets.

This explains the phrase “ויהיו תואמים מלמטה” — that the boards were to be closely joined at the bottom.

On the word “משלבת,” Rashi explains that the tenons were shaped like the rungs of a ladder, separated from one another and smoothed at their ends so they could fit into the hollow sockets.

On the phrase “אשה אל אחתה,” he explains that the tenons had to correspond exactly, with equal cuts on both sides, so that one would not lean inward and the other outward. The Targum renders “ידות” as “צירין,” pivots, because they resembled door pivots inserted into sockets.

26:18 — “לִפְאַת נֶגֶב תֵּימָנָה”

“On the south side southward…”

Rashi explains that the word “פאה” here does not mean a corner, but the entire side. Thus, the verse refers to the southern side.

26:22 — “וּלְיַרְכְּתֵי הַמִּשְׁכָּן”

“And for the back part of the Mishkan…”

Rashi explains that “ירכתי” means the end or back. Since the entrance was on the east, the east was considered the front, and the west the back.

On the phrase “תעשה ששה קרשים,” he explains that six boards were placed at the west, giving a width of nine cubits.

26:23 — “וּשְׁנֵי קְרָשִׁים תַּעֲשֶׂה לַמִּקְצֹעֹת”

“And two boards you shall make for the corners…”

Rashi explains that these were one for the northwest corner and one for the southwest corner.

Although there were eight boards in total across the west, the two corner boards were not fully visible inside the Mishkan. Only half a cubit of each appeared inside, completing the width to ten cubits.

The remaining cubit of each corner board aligned with the thickness of the boards on the north and south sides, ensuring that the exterior walls were even.

26:24 — “וְיִהְיוּ תֹאֲמִים מִלְּמַטָּה”

“And they shall be coupled together beneath…”

Rashi explains that all the boards were to be joined closely at the bottom so that the thickness of the socket rims would not create gaps between them.

This was achieved by cutting the tenons so that the boards would extend slightly over the sides, covering the rims of the sockets and fitting tightly together.

The corner boards were also cut along their thickness to correspond with the boards of the north and south walls, preventing the sockets from separating them.

On the phrase “ויחדו יהיו תמים,” Rashi explains that “תמים” here has the same meaning as “תואמים,” indicating that they were to be joined together.

On the words “על ראשו,” he explains that this refers to the top of each board.

On the phrase “אל הטבעת האחת,” Rashi explains that each board had two semi-circular cuts at the top, one on each side, matching the thickness of a ring. Both boards were inserted into the same ring, connecting them.

Rashi notes uncertainty about whether these rings were fixed or movable.

At the corners, the ring was inserted into the cuts of the north and south boards, and the adjacent western board was also inserted into it, thereby connecting the walls.

On the phrase “כן יהיה לשניהם,” he explains that this arrangement applied to both corners: the northwestern and southwestern ends.

26:25 — “וְהָיוּ שְׁמֹנָה קְרָשִׁים”

“And they shall be eight boards…”

Rashi explains that these eight boards are the same ones mentioned earlier: six boards for the western side, plus two corner boards. Together they formed eight boards on the west.

He cites the Mishnah describing how the boards were constructed. The sockets were hollow, and each board was cut at the bottom so that a quarter of its width remained on each side, with the middle portion removed. This formed two tenons, like two rungs of a ladder, separated from one another. These were smoothed so they could fit into the hollow sockets, like a ladder rung inserted into a hole.

The tenons were inserted into two sockets, as the Torah states. At the top, each board was cut slightly on each side and inserted into a single golden ring so that the boards would be joined together, as it says, “they shall be coupled together beneath.”

26:26 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ בְרִיחִם”

“And you shall make bolts…”

Rashi explains that the “בריחים” were bolts, as translated by the Targum.

On the phrase “חמשה לקרשי צלע המשכן,” he explains that the five bolts were effectively three, because the top and bottom bolts were each made of two pieces. One piece extended from one end of the wall to the midpoint, and the other from the opposite end to the midpoint, where they met.

Thus:

• The upper bolt consisted of two pieces.
• The lower bolt consisted of two pieces.
• The middle bolt was a single piece running the entire length of the wall, from end to end.

The upper and lower bolts were inserted through rings fixed to the boards. Each board had two rings placed at equal intervals along its ten-cubit height, dividing it into four equal sections. This alignment ensured that the rings were opposite one another, allowing the bolts to pass through easily.

The middle bolt did not pass through rings. Instead, the boards were bored through their thickness, and the bolt passed through these holes. This is the meaning of “בתוך הקרשים” — through the midst of the boards.

The lengths of the bolts were as follows:

• On the north and south sides:
  – Upper and lower bolts: fifteen cubits each.
  – Middle bolt: thirty cubits long, running from east to west.
• On the west side:
  – Upper and lower bolts: six cubits each.
  – Middle bolt: twelve cubits long, corresponding to the width of the eight boards.

26:29 — “בָּתִּים לַבְּרִיחִם”

“Places for the bolts…”

Rashi explains that the rings on the boards served as receptacles into which the bolts were inserted.

On the phrase “וצפית את הבריחם זהב,” he explains that the bolts themselves were not overlaid with gold. Instead, the boards had golden fittings—like two hollow, split tubes—fixed on either side of each ring. The bolts passed through these fittings, giving the appearance that they were overlaid with gold.

These bolts projected outward on the exterior walls. The rings and fittings were not visible from inside the Mishkan; the interior walls appeared smooth and unbroken.

26:30 — “וַהֲקֵמֹתָ אֶת הַמִּשְׁכָּן”

“And you shall set up the Mishkan…”

Rashi explains that this instruction means that after the Mishkan was completed, it was to be erected.

On the phrase “אשר הראית בהר,” he explains that it must be read as “which you will have been shown on the mountain.” Hashem would later show Moshe the manner in which it was to be erected.

26:31 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ פָרֹכֶת”

“And you shall make a partition…”

Rashi explains that “פרכת” means a partition. In the language of the Sages, “פרגוד” refers to a curtain that separates a king from the people.

On the phrase “תכלת וארגמן,” he explains that each material was composed of six threads twisted together.

“מעשה חשב” refers to a woven fabric with designs on both sides that were different from each other.

“כרבים” indicates that figures of creatures were woven into it.

26:32 — “אַרְבָּעָה עַמּוּדֵי שִׁטִּים”

“Four pillars of shittim wood…”

Rashi explains that these pillars were inserted into four sockets. Hooks were fixed to them, bent upward, on which a pole was placed. The top of the paroches was wrapped around this pole. The hooks are called “ווים,” because they were shaped like the letter vav.

The paroches measured ten cubits by ten cubits. It was placed one-third of the way from the western end of the Mishkan, creating:

• Ten cubits for the Holy of Holies.
• Twenty cubits for the outer chamber.

This arrangement corresponded to the joining point of the two sections of the roof curtains.

26:35 — “וְשַׂמְתָּ אֶת הַשֻּׁלְחָן”

“And you shall place the table…”

Rashi explains the arrangement inside the Mishkan:

• The table stood on the north side, two and a half cubits from the north wall.
• The menorah stood on the south side, two and a half cubits from the south wall.
• The golden altar stood in the center, opposite the space between the table and the menorah, slightly toward the east.

All three were placed in the inner half of the outer chamber. The distance from the entrance to the paroches was twenty cubits, and the table, menorah, and altar were positioned ten cubits from the entrance, toward the west.

26:36 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ מָסָךְ”

“And you shall make a screen…”

Rashi explains that the “מסך” was a curtain placed at the entrance, serving as a protective screen. The word is related to “שכת,” meaning to hedge or protect, as in Iyov 1:10.

On the phrase “מעשה רקם,” he explains that the designs were embroidered by needlework. Unlike the woven designs of the paroches, the images on this screen were identical on both sides.

The word “רקם” refers to the embroiderer, the craftsman, not to the craft itself.

The size of this screen was the same as that of the paroches: ten cubits by ten cubits.

Chapter 26 Summary

In Chapter 26, Rashi explains the structure of the Mishkan itself—its curtains, coverings, boards, bolts, and partitions. He provides detailed measurements and spatial calculations, clarifying how the curtains were arranged and how the boards were fitted together with sockets and bolts. Rashi also describes the layered coverings of the Mishkan and their protective symbolism. He explains the placement of the paroches and the arrangement of the vessels inside the Sanctuary, showing how the Mishkan’s layout reflected order, holiness, and separation between the sacred spaces.

Chapter 27

27:1 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ אֶת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ… וְשָׁלֹשׁ אַמּוֹת קֹמָתוֹ”

“And you shall make the altar… and its height shall be three cubits.”

Rashi cites a dispute between the Sages:

• Rabbi Yehudah holds that the verse is literal: the altar’s height was three cubits.
• Rabbi Yose argues by comparison to the inner (golden) altar, which is also described as “square.” Just as the inner altar’s height was twice its length, so too the outer altar’s height was twice its length—ten cubits.

According to Rabbi Yose, the phrase “three cubits its height” refers only to the height measured from the top edge of the surrounding ledge (the סובב) upward, not from the ground.

27:2 — “מִמֶּנּוּ תִּהְיֶיןָ קַרְנֹתָיו”

“Its horns shall be of the same…”

Rashi explains that the horns of the altar were not to be made separately and then attached. Rather, they were to be formed from the same structure as the altar itself.

On the phrase “וצפית אתו נחשת,” Rashi explains that the copper overlay symbolically atoned for sins committed with brazenness or impudence. The Hebrew expression for such effrontery is “a copper forehead,” as in Yeshayahu 48:4.

27:3 — “סִירֹתָיו… לְדַשְּׁנוֹ”

“Its pots… to remove its ashes.”

Rashi explains:

• “סירתיו” were pot-like vessels.
• “לדשנו” means to remove its ashes into these vessels, as translated by Onkelos.

He notes that certain Hebrew roots can carry opposite meanings, such as both “to cover with ashes” and “to remove ashes,” and provides several scriptural examples of similar linguistic patterns.

On the additional utensils:

• “ויעיו” were shovels used to remove ashes. They resembled thin metal lids with handles.
• “ומזרקתיו” were bowls used to receive the blood of sacrifices.
• “ומזלגתיו” were flesh-hooks—bent implements used to turn the meat on the fire so it would burn more quickly.
• “ומחתתיו” were fire-pans used to collect coals from the altar and carry them to the inner altar for the incense service.

The phrase “לכל כליו” simply means “all its vessels,” with the letter ל being superfluous.

27:4 — “מִכְבַּר מַעֲשֵׂה רֶשֶׁת”

“A grate of network…”

Rashi explains that “מכבר” is related to the word “כברה,” a sieve. It refers to a covering for the altar made with many holes, like a net.

He notes that the verse’s wording is transposed. It should be understood as: “You shall make for it a copper grate, a networked work.”

27:5 — “כַּרְכֹּב הַמִּזְבֵּחַ”

“The surround of the altar…”

Rashi explains that “כרכב” means a surrounding ledge. Anything encircling an object is called a “כרכב.”

On the altar, this referred to a recessed band running around its sides, one cubit wide, for decoration. It was located near the top of the altar, at the height corresponding to the opinion that the altar was ten cubits tall.

Rashi explains that there were actually two “surrounds”:

1. A decorative surround on the side of the altar.
2. A functional surround on the top, between the horns, where the Kohanim walked while performing the service.
   Rashi on Parshas Terumah – Exod…

Together, the area between the horns and the walking space formed a two-cubit-wide band.

The decorative surround also marked the midpoint of the altar’s height, distinguishing between the upper and lower areas where different sacrificial blood was applied. A similar red line marking this division was later used in the Beis HaMikdash.

Rashi also notes that although the ramp (כבש) is not mentioned here, it is implied earlier by the prohibition against ascending the altar by steps. Instead, there was a smooth ramp on the south side.

The altar was called an “altar of earth” because its hollow interior was filled with earth at each encampment in the wilderness.

27:7 — “וְהוּבָא אֶת בַּדָּיו בַּטַּבָּעֹת”

“And its staves shall be brought into the rings…”

Rashi explains that this refers to the four rings that were made for the grate of the altar, as described earlier. The staves were inserted into those rings.

27:8 — “נְבֻב לֻחֹת תַּעֲשֶׂה אֹתוֹ”

“Hollow with boards shall you make it.”

Rashi explains that the altar was constructed as hollow boards of shittim wood on all sides, leaving an empty space inside. It was not made as a single solid block of wood five cubits by five cubits, like the trunk of a hollowed tree.

27:9 — “קְלָעִים לֶחָצֵר”

“Hangings for the courtyard…”

Rashi explains that these hangings were made like the sails of ships—full of holes, formed by plaited work rather than woven fabric. The Targum translates them similarly to the grate, because both were perforated like a sieve.

On the phrase “לפאה האחת,” Rashi explains that the word “פאה” here refers to the entire side, not just a corner.

27:10 — “וְעַמֻּדָיו עֶשְׂרִים”

“And its columns, twenty…”

Rashi explains that there was a space of five cubits between each column.

On the phrase “ואדניהם נחשת,” he explains that the sockets of the columns were made of copper and rested on the ground, with the columns inserted into them.

He describes a rail-like piece attached to each column:

• It measured six handbreadths by three.
• A copper ring was fixed in its center.
• The upper edge of the curtain was wrapped around this rail with cords at each column.
• The rail was hung by its ring on a hook in the column.

The hook was shaped like the letter vav: one end bent upward, the other driven into the column, similar to hooks used for hanging doors.

Thus, the curtain hung downward from the rail, and its width formed the height of the courtyard walls.

On the phrase “ווי העמודים,” Rashi explains that these are the hooks already described.

“וחשקיהם” refers to silver fillets encircling the columns. Rashi is uncertain whether these encircled the entire column, only the top, or the middle. However, he explains that the term “חשוק” means “bound” or “encircled,” as seen in another verse.

27:13 — “לִפְאַת קֵדְמָה מִזְרָחָה”

“On the east side, eastward…”

Rashi explains that the words mean “the face of the east.” The term “קדם” denotes the front, while “אחור” denotes the back. Therefore, the east is called the front of the world, and the west the back.

On the phrase “חמשים אמה,” he explains that the full fifty cubits of the eastern side were not closed by hangings, because that was the entrance. Instead:

• Fifteen cubits of curtains were placed on one side of the entrance.
• Fifteen cubits on the other side.
• This left an open space of twenty cubits in the middle.

This is the meaning of the verse describing the screen for the gate of the courtyard as twenty cubits long.

27:14 — “וְעַמֻּדֵיהֶם שְׁלֹשָׁה”

“And their columns, three…”

Rashi explains that there were five cubits between each column. He describes the spacing:

• From the column at the southeastern corner to the first of the three eastern columns: five cubits.
• From the first to the second: five cubits.
• From the second to the third: five cubits.

The same arrangement existed on the other side of the entrance.

In addition, four columns supported the entrance screen. Altogether, there were ten columns on the east, corresponding to the ten columns on the west.

27:17 — “כָּל עַמּוּדֵי הֶחָצֵר סָבִיב…”

“All the columns of the courtyard around…”

Rashi explains that since the Torah explicitly mentioned hooks, fillets, and copper sockets only for the north and south sides, this verse teaches that all the columns around the courtyard—on every side—had copper sockets and fittings.

27:18 — “אֹרֶךְ הֶחָצֵר”

“The length of the courtyard…”

Rashi explains that the north and south sides, which ran from east to west, measured one hundred cubits.

On the phrase “ורחב חמשים בחמשים,” he explains that the eastern section of the courtyard formed a square of fifty by fifty cubits.

The Mishkan itself measured:

• Thirty cubits long.
• Ten cubits wide.

Its entrance was placed at the eastern edge of the inner fifty cubits of the courtyard. As a result:

• There were twenty cubits of space behind the Mishkan, between its rear curtains and the western hangings.
• There were twenty cubits of space on both the north and south sides between the Mishkan and the courtyard hangings.
• In front of the Mishkan, the courtyard measured fifty by fifty cubits.

On the phrase “וקמה חמש אמות,” Rashi explains that the height of the courtyard partitions was five cubits, which was the width of the hanging curtains.

On “ואדניהם נחשת,” he explains that this statement includes the sockets of the entrance screen, so that one should not assume only the sockets of the courtyard hangings were made of copper.

27:19 — “לְכֹל כְּלֵי הַמִּשְׁכָּן”

“For all the vessels of the Mishkan…”

Rashi explains that this refers to tools needed for setting up and dismantling the Mishkan, such as hammers used to drive in the pegs and columns.

On the word “יתדת” (pegs), Rashi explains that these were copper stakes used for the curtains of the tent and the courtyard hangings. They were fastened with cords around the lower edges so that the wind would not lift them.

Rashi notes uncertainty about whether they were driven into the ground or simply hung down by their weight. However, he concludes that their name implies they were driven into the ground, and cites a verse in Yeshayahu that supports this understanding.

Chapter 27 Summary

In Chapter 27, Rashi turns to the outer structures of the Mishkan, especially the copper altar and the courtyard. He explains the construction, measurements, and symbolic elements of the altar, including the horns, the surrounding ledge, and the copper overlay. Rashi details the various vessels used in the sacrificial service and clarifies the structure of the courtyard hangings, pillars, and sockets. He also describes the spatial arrangement of the courtyard and the Mishkan within it, emphasizing the precise order and function of every component.

Summary of Rashi on Parshas Terumah

Rashi’s commentary on Parshas Terumah reveals the Mishkan as a carefully designed sanctuary built with intention, precision, and sacred symbolism. He explains the language of the verses, the traditions of Chazal, and the structural details of the Mishkan and its vessels, showing how each element reflects a deeper spiritual purpose. Through Rashi’s explanations, the Mishkan emerges not only as a physical structure but as a model of holiness—an ordered space where Divine presence could dwell among Israel.

📖 Source

• Rashi on Terumah: 25:2-27:19

Ramban on Parshas Terumah– Commentary

Introduction to Ramban on Parshas Terumah

Ramban presents Parshas Terumah as the continuation of the revelation at Sinai, now translated into a physical dwelling for the Divine Presence. The Mishkan is not merely a structure, but a portable Sinai — a place where the Shechinah rests among Israel just as it did on the mountain. Through his commentary, Ramban explains the vessels, materials, and measurements not only in their practical dimensions, but also in their spiritual symbolism: the Aron as the throne of Divine glory, the Shulchan as the channel of blessing, and the Menorah as the hidden light of wisdom. The entire Mishkan is thus understood as a microcosm of creation and a living testimony to the covenant between Hashem and His people.

Chapter 25

25:1 — וַיְדַבֵּר ה׳ אֶל מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר
“And Hashem spoke to Moshe, saying.”

Ramban explains that after Hashem spoke with Israel face to face at Har Sinai, giving them the Aseres HaDibros, He then commanded them through Moshe certain mitzvos that serve as general principles for the entire Torah. This process is compared to how Chazal instructed converts — first teaching them fundamental mitzvos before the full system (יבמות מז.).

Klal Yisrael accepted upon themselves to fulfill everything Hashem would command through Moshe, and a covenant was established. From this point forward, they became His nation and He became their G-d, fulfilling the earlier condition stated:

“וְעַתָּה אִם שָׁמוֹעַ תִּשְׁמְעוּ בְּקֹלִי… וִהְיִיתֶם לִי סְגֻלָּה” (שמות י״ט:ה׳)
“וְאַתֶּם תִּהְיוּ לִי מַמְלֶכֶת כֹּהֲנִים וְגוֹי קָדוֹשׁ” (שם י״ט:ו׳)

Now that they had become a holy nation, they were worthy that a Sanctuary exist among them for the indwelling of the Shechinah. Therefore, the first command after the covenant concerns the Mishkan — that there should be a house among them dedicated to His Name, from which He would speak with Moshe and command Bnei Yisrael.

The primary purpose of the Mishkan, Ramban explains, is the resting place of the Shechinah, represented by the Aron. As it says:

“וְנוֹעַדְתִּי לְךָ שָׁם וְדִבַּרְתִּי אִתְּךָ מֵעַל הַכַּפֹּרֶת” (שמות כ״ה:כ״ב)

For this reason, the Torah first commands the Aron and the Kapores, since they are foremost in importance. Afterward come the Shulchan and the Menorah, vessels similar to the Aron, which express the purpose for which the Mishkan exists.

However, in Parshas Vayakhel, Moshe first describes the Mishkan structure — its tent and coverings — and Betzalel likewise constructs them first (שמות ל״ה:י״א; ל״ו:ח׳). This is because, from the practical standpoint, the building must precede the vessels.

Ramban then reveals the “secret of the Mishkan”:

The glory that rested openly upon Har Sinai now rests in the Mishkan in a concealed manner. Just as it is written regarding Sinai:

“וַיִּשְׁכֹּן כְּבוֹד ה׳ עַל הַר סִינַי” (שמות כ״ד:ט״ז)
“הֵן הֶרְאָנוּ ה׳ אֱלֹקֵינוּ אֶת כְּבֹדוֹ וְאֶת גָּדְלוֹ” (דברים ה׳:כ״א)

So too regarding the Mishkan:

“וּכְבוֹד ה׳ מָלֵא אֶת הַמִּשְׁכָּן” (שמות מ׳:ל״ד)

This phrase appears twice with respect to the Mishkan, corresponding to “His glory and His greatness” at Sinai. Thus, the same Divine Glory that appeared at Sinai was always present among Israel within the Mishkan.

When Moshe entered the Mishkan, he would hear the Divine speech in the same manner as at Sinai. As it says regarding the giving of the Torah:

“מִן הַשָּׁמַיִם הִשְׁמִיעֲךָ אֶת קֹלוֹ… וְעַל הָאָרֶץ הֶרְאֲךָ אֶת אִשּׁוֹ הַגְּדוֹלָה” (דברים ד׳:ל״ו)

And similarly regarding the Mishkan:

“וַיִּשְׁמַע אֶת הַקּוֹל מִדַּבֵּר אֵלָיו… מִבֵּין שְׁנֵי הַכְּרֻבִים וַיְדַבֵּר אֵלָיו” (במדבר ז׳:פ״ט)

The phrase “וַיְדַבֵּר אֵלָיו” is repeated to teach, according to the received tradition, that the voice came from heaven to Moshe above the Kapores, and from there spoke to him. All Divine speech with Moshe came from heaven during the day and was heard from between the Keruvim, similar to:

“וּדְבָרָיו שָׁמַעְתָּ מִתּוֹךְ הָאֵשׁ” (דברים ד׳:ל״ו)

For this reason, the Keruvim were made of gold.

Scripture also states:

“אֲשֶׁר אִוָּעֵד לָכֶם שָׁמָּה לְדַבֵּר אֵלֶיךָ שָׁם וְנִקְדַּשׁ בִּכְבוֹדִי” (שמות כ״ט:מ״ב–מ״ג)

There, in the Mishkan, would be the appointed place for Divine speech, sanctified by His glory.

One who carefully studies the verses of Matan Torah, Ramban says, will understand the secret of the Mishkan and the Beis HaMikdash. This can also be seen from the prayer of Shlomo HaMelech:

“ה׳ אֱלֹקֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל” (מלכים א׳ ח׳:כ״ג)
Similar to: “וַיִּרְאוּ אֵת אֱלֹקֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל” (שמות כ״ד:י׳)

Shlomo adds the Name “Hashem,” alluding to the idea that the G-d of Israel sits upon the Keruvim, as it says:

“וּכְבוֹד אֱלֹקֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל עֲלֵיהֶם… וָאֵדַע כִּי כְרוּבִים הֵמָּה” (יחזקאל י׳:י״ט–כ׳)

And David said:

“וּלְתַבְנִית הַמֶּרְכָּבָה הַכְּרֻבִים זָהָב… עַל אֲרוֹן בְּרִית ה׳” (דהי״א כ״ח:י״ח)

Shlomo constantly refers to the Mikdash as being “for the Name of Hashem”:

“לְשֵׁם ה׳” (מלכים א׳ ה׳:י״ט)
“לִשְׁמֶךָ” (שם ח׳:מ״ד)

And repeatedly says in his prayer:

“וְאַתָּה תִּשְׁמַע הַשָּׁמַיִם” (שם ח׳:ל״ב)

Meaning: the Divine presence in the Mikdash is an expression of heavenly mercy.

Shlomo also explains:

“כִּי הַאֻמְנָם יֵשֵׁב אֱלֹקִים אֶת הָאָדָם עַל הָאָרֶץ? הִנֵּה שָׁמַיִם וּשְׁמֵי הַשָּׁמַיִם לֹא יְכַלְכְּלוּךָ” (דהי״ב ו׳:י״ח)

Regarding the Aron it says:

“אֲרוֹן הָאֱלֹקִים… שֵׁם ה׳ צְבָאוֹת יֹשֵׁב הַכְּרֻבִים עָלָיו” (שמואל ב׳ ו׳:ב׳)

And similarly:

“אֲרוֹן הָאֱלֹקִים ה׳ יוֹשֵׁב הַכְּרוּבִים אֲשֶׁר נִקְרָא שֵׁם” (דהי״א י״ג:ו׳)

For the Name of Hashem rests upon the Keruvim.

25:3 — וְזֹאת הַתְּרוּמָה
“And this is the offering.”

Ramban explains, on the level of sod (“דֶּרֶךְ הָאֱמֶת”), that the word “וְזֹאת” carries a deeper meaning. It parallels other verses where “זֹאת” refers to a Divine endowment or presence:

“וַה׳ נָתַן חָכְמָה לִשְׁלֹמֹה” (מלכים א׳ ה׳:כ״ו)
“וְזֹאת אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר לָהֶם אֲבִיהֶם” (בראשית מ״ט:כ״ח)
“וְזֹאת הַבְּרָכָה” (דברים ל״ג:א׳)
“מֵאֵת ה׳ הָיְתָה זֹּאת” (תהלים קי״ח:כ״ג)

Chazal already alluded to this in Bereishis Rabbah (בראשית רבה ק׳:י״ב) on the verse:

“מִזְּקֵנִים אֶתְבּוֹנָן” (תהלים קי״ט:ק׳)

And in Shemos Rabbah it is explained:

“וְזֹאת הַתְּרוּמָה” refers to Knesses Yisrael itself, which is called a terumah, as it says:

“קֹדֶשׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל לַה׳ רֵאשִׁית תְּבוּאָתֹה” (ירמיהו ב׳:ג׳)

Another Midrash (שמו״ר ל״ג:א׳) teaches:

Hashem said to Israel: “I have sold you My Torah, and, as it were, I have sold Myself with it,” as it says:

“וְיִקְחוּ לִי תְּרוּמָה” (שמות כ״ה:ב׳)

The Midrash reads this as: “They shall take Me as the offering.”

Thus, the offering will be for Me — and I will be with it — like the verse:

“דּוֹדִי לִי וַאֲנִי לוֹ” (שיר השירים ב׳:ט״ז)

Similarly, the phrase:

“כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מַרְאֶה אוֹתְךָ” (שמות כ״ה:ט׳)

Teaches that “I” — Hashem — am the One showing the form. Likewise:

“הֶרְאָה אֹתְךָ” (שמות כ״ז:ח׳)
“אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה מָרְאֶה” (שמות כ״ח:מ׳)

All allude to the Divine “I” present within the process.

So too David said:

“הַכֹּל בִּכְתָב מִיַּד ה׳ עָלַי הִשְׂכִּיל” (דהי״א כ״ח:י״ט)

Meaning, the hand of Hashem was upon him, guiding the design of the Mikdash.

25:6 — בְּשָׂמִים לְשֶׁמֶן הַמִּשְׁחָה וְלִקְטֹרֶת הַסַּמִּים
“Spices for the anointing oil and for the incense of aromatics.”

Ramban records several explanations of the phrase.

Some say this is an abbreviated expression, and the meaning is: “spices for the anointing oil and aromatics for the incense.” Others, citing Ibn Ezra in the name of contemporary sages, explain that the verse should be read in reverse order: “and for the incense of aromatics they shall bring aromatics.” The Torah uses the definite article — “הַסַּמִּים” — to indicate the specific aromatics suitable for incense, even though their full composition is not yet explained here.

Rabbi Avraham Ibn Ezra explains that the verse should be taken literally: spices were brought for both the anointing oil and the incense. The incense included spices such as spikenard, saffron, and cinnamon, as taught by Chazal (כריתות ו.). There was no need for the Torah to say explicitly “spices and aromatics for the incense,” since it already said “incense of aromatics,” just as it does not say “oil for the anointing oil.” Ramban concludes that this is the correct interpretation.

These differing explanations arise because, according to linguists, the terms “סַמִּים” and “בְּשָׂמִים” have distinct meanings:

• “סַמִּים” are medicinal substances, not edible, such as frankincense and galbanum.
• “בְּשָׂמִים” are edible aromatics, called “מִסְעָדִים,” because their fragrance strengthens and sustains.

However, according to Rashi, the word “סַמִּים” is simply another name for “בְּשָׂמִים.” This is also the intent of Chazal, who taught that eleven “סַמָּנִים” of the incense were given to Moshe at Sinai (כריתות ו.), even though some of them — like spikenard, saffron, and cinnamon — are clearly “בְּשָׂמִים.” Onkelos likewise translates both terms as “בֻּסְמִין.” Ramban states that this is the correct understanding of the verse.

Nevertheless, since the Torah uses two different terms, it is possible to explain that “בְּשָׂמִים” refers to the choicest and most distinguished spices. Thus we find:

“בְּשָׂמִים רֹאשׁ” (שמות ל׳:כ״ג)
“בְּרֹאשׁ כָּל בֹּשֶׂם” (יחזקאל כ״ז:כ״ב)

Ramban further suggests that the words “בְּשָׂמִים” and “בֹּשֶׂם” may be composite expressions: “בּוֹ שָׂם” or “בָּהּ סַמִּים” — “in it is spice.”

Proof that “בְּשָׂמִים” includes also “סַמִּים” is found in several verses:

• “בְּשָׂמִים רֹאשׁ מָר דְּרוֹר” (שמות ל׳:כ״ג), where myrrh is included among the “בְּשָׂמִים,” even though it is a medicinal substance.
• “נֵרְדְּ וְכַרְכֹּם קָנֶה וְקִנָּמוֹן… מֹר וַאֲהָלוֹת עִם כָּל רָאשֵׁי בְשָׂמִים” (שיר השירים ד׳:י״ד).
• “הָפִיחִי גַנִּי יִזְּלוּ בְשָׂמָיו” (שם ד׳:ט״ז).

Another proof appears later:

“וְאֶת הַבֹּשֶׂם וְאֶת הַשָּׁמֶן לְמָאוֹר וּלְשֶׁמֶן הַמִּשְׁחָה וְלִקְטֹרֶת הַסַּמִּים” (שמות ל״ה:כ״ח)

There, the Torah mentions only “בֹּשֶׂם,” not “סַמִּים,” implying that all were included under the general category of “בֹּשֶׂם.”

25:7 — אַבְנֵי שֹׁהַם וְאַבְנֵי מִלֻּאִים לָאֵפֹד וְלַחֹשֶׁן
“Onyx stones and stones for setting, for the ephod and the breastplate.”

Ramban first cites Rashi, who explains that “אבני מילואים” are stones that fill the indentation made in the gold setting. The indentation is called a “משבצת,” and the stones fill it. According to Rashi, the onyx stones were for the ephod, and the stones of filling were for the breastplate.

Ramban rejects this explanation for several reasons:

• It is unreasonable that the Torah would call them “stones of filling” now, based on a future command to place them into indentations.
• The onyx stones of the ephod were also placed in gold settings, yet they are not called “stones of filling.”
• Chazal taught that these stones were not engraved with a chisel because of the phrase “בְּמִלֻּאֹתָם” (סוטה מח:). If the meaning were merely that they fill the indentations, there would be no proof against engraving them with a chisel.

Ramban also disagrees with Rashi’s description of the setting. Instead, he follows Onkelos, who translates the setting as “מרמצן,” meaning a gold base with three prongs extending upward to hold the stone. This is similar to a fork-like setting, as described in the language of the Sages (נדה סב.; שבת קג.). This method is still used today when setting precious stones in rings, so that their beauty is visible from all sides rather than hidden inside an indentation.

He brings proof from the verse that describes the gold chains of the breastplate being attached to the “משבצות” on the shoulder-pieces of the ephod (שמות כ״ח:כ״ה). If these were merely indentations for stones, they could not serve to attach chains. Rather, they must be pronged settings with holes for the chains.

He further connects this to the word:

“כִּי אֲחָזַנִי הַשָּׁבָץ” (שמואל ב׳ א׳:ט׳)

Which he explains as referring to warriors holding forked spears used to catch fleeing enemies.

According to Onkelos, the stones were set into frames, from which prongs extended around them to hold them in place.

Ramban then explains the true meaning of the term “מִלֻּאִים”:

It refers to stones that are complete in their natural state, not hewn or cut from a larger quarry. Natural science shows that the special qualities of precious stones exist only when they are in their original, whole state — like smooth stones taken from a river. Therefore Onkelos translates “אבני מילואים” as “אבני אשלמותא” — stones of perfection.

When Onkelos translates the word “מילוי” in other contexts, he renders it literally as “filling,” such as:

“וַתְּמַלֵּא כַדָּהּ” (בראשית כ״ד:ט״ז) — “וּמְלִיאַת”

But here he translates it as “perfection,” as in:

“מִלֵּא אֹתָם חָכְמַת לֵב” (שמות ל״ה:ל״ה)

Which he renders as “אַשְׁלֵם,” meaning that they were perfected in wisdom. This is not a filling of a vessel but a state of completeness.

Thus, in the verse:

“וּבַחֲרֹשֶׁת אֶבֶן לְמַלֹּאת” (שמות ל״א:ה׳)

It means engraving stones in their natural, complete state.

Ramban distinguishes between the stones of the ephod and those of the breastplate:

• Regarding the ephod, the Torah says:
  “פִּתּוּחֵי חֹתָם תְּפַתַּח… עַל שְׁמֹת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל” (שמות כ״ח:י״א)
  This indicates that the names were engraved with a chisel, like normal stone engraving. Thus, they were no longer in their natural, perfect state.
• But regarding the breastplate:
  “וּמִלֵּאתָ בוֹ מִלֻּאַת אֶבֶן” (שמות כ״ח:י״ז)
  “יִהְיוּ בְּמִלֻּאֹתָם” (שם כ׳)

These stones remained in their natural state, and yet the names of the tribes had to appear upon them. Therefore Moshe had no solution except to use the shamir, as taught by Chazal (סוטה מח:):

• They were not written upon with ink, because it says “פִּתּוּחֵי חֹתָם.”
• They were not engraved with a chisel, because it says “בְּמִלֻּאֹתָם.”
• Rather, the shamir was brought near, and the stones split of their own accord.

The term “בְּמִלֻּאֹתָם” applies only to the stones of the breastplate.

If a Midrash states that the shamir was used for the stones of the ephod, Ramban explains that the breastplate is sometimes called “ephod” by association, since it is attached to it. For example:

“הַגִּישָׁה הָאֵפוֹד” (שמואל א׳ כ״ג:ט׳)

Where the inquiry was actually made through the breastplate.

Thus, according to Ramban, the verse should be understood:

• Onyx stones: three stones — two for the ephod and one for the breastplate.
• Stones of “milu’im”: for the breastplate.

If, however, Chazal hold that even the ephod stones had to be in their natural state, then both the onyx stones and the stones of “milu’im” would apply to both the ephod and the breastplate.

25:9 — כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מַרְאֶה אוֹתְךָ… וְכֵן תַּעֲשׂוּ
“According to all that I show you… and so shall you make.”

Ramban cites Rashi, who explains that the phrase “וְכֵן תַּעֲשׂוּ” teaches that this pattern must be followed not only for the Mishkan in the wilderness, but also in future generations. If one of the vessels is lost, or when the vessels of the Beis HaMikdash in Yerushalayim are made — such as the tables, menoros, and lavers made by Shlomo — they must follow the same pattern.

Ramban questions this explanation. He does not know how it could be true that Shlomo was obligated to make the vessels of the Beis HaMikdash according to this exact pattern, since we see that the copper altar made by Shlomo was twenty cubits by twenty cubits (דהי״ב ד׳:א׳), different from the altar in the Mishkan.

He then cites Ibn Ezra, who explains that the phrase “וְכֵן תַּעֲשׂוּ” refers only to the vessels, since earlier the Torah said:

“וְעָשׂוּ לִי מִקְדָּשׁ”
“And they shall make for Me a Sanctuary.”

According to Ramban’s own understanding of the peshat, there is no need for either interpretation. Rather, the repetition serves to express emphasis and urgency. The meaning is:

• “וְעָשׂוּ לִי מִקְדָּשׁ” — they should make a Sanctuary, a house and its vessels, like a royal palace and throne of majesty,
• “וְשָׁכַנְתִּי בְּתוֹכָם” — so that the Shechinah will dwell among them in that house and on the throne of glory prepared there,
• “כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מַרְאֶה אוֹתְךָ” — according to the pattern shown to Moshe.

The phrase “וְכֵן תַּעֲשׂוּ” is then repeated to urge them all to act with zeal and diligence. It is similar to the expression:

“וַיַּעֲשׂוּ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה ה׳ אֶת מֹשֶׁה כֵּן עָשׂוּ” (שמות ל״ט:ל״ב)

There, the repetition describes the completed action; here, it emphasizes the command itself.

25:10 — וְעָשׂוּ אֲרוֹן
“And they shall make an ark.”

Ramban explains that the plural expression “וְעָשׂוּ” refers back to the Bnei Yisrael mentioned earlier. But immediately afterward the Torah switches to the singular:

“וְצִפִּיתָ אֹתוֹ”
“וְיָצַקְתָּ לוֹ”

This is because Moshe represents all of Israel, as taught in the Mechilta (מכילתא יתרו א).

Ramban suggests a deeper implication: the plural form indicates that all of Israel should participate in the making of the Aron, since it is the holiest dwelling-place of the Most High, and through this they would all merit the Torah.

Chazal say in Midrash Rabbah (שמו״ר ל״ד:ב׳):

Why does it say regarding all the vessels, “וְעָשִׂיתָ” — “and you shall make,” but regarding the Aron it says “וְעָשׂוּ” — “and they shall make”?
Hashem said: Let everyone come and involve themselves in the making of the Aron so that all may merit the Torah.

This involvement could take several forms:

• Each person contributing a golden vessel for the Aron,
• Assisting Betzalel in even a small way,
• Or at least directing their intention toward its construction.

25:12 — וְיָצַקְתָּ לוֹ אַרְבַּע טַבְּעֹת זָהָב… בְּאַרְבַּע פַּעֲמֹתָיו
“And you shall cast for it four rings of gold… on its four ‘pa’amoth.’”

Ramban cites Rashi, who interprets “פַּעֲמֹתָיו” as “corners,” following the Targum. According to Rashi, the rings were placed on the upper corners near the kapores. The verse then explains that two rings were on one side and two on the other.

Ramban accepts Rashi’s identification of the rings but questions the placement on the upper corners:

• The weight of the Aron and the Luchos would make the burden heavier if suspended from above.
• It is more respectful for the Aron to be carried elevated upon the shoulders of the kohanim.

Ibn Ezra argues that the word “פַּעַם” never means corner, but rather “foot,” as in:

“מַה יָּפוּ פְעָמַיִךְ” (שיר השירים ז׳:ב׳)
“פַּעֲמֵי דַלִּים” (ישעיה כ״ו:ו׳)

He therefore proposes that the Aron had feet, and there were eight rings: four below for carrying, and four above for decoration.

Ramban rejects this entirely. If “פַּעַם” means foot, then the verse simply means the rings were at the lower corners, which are called “feet” because Hebrew often describes objects using human anatomy — top as “head” and bottom as “foot.”

He then offers his own interpretation: “פַּעַם” means “step” or “stride,” as in:

“מַה יָּפוּ פְעָמַיִךְ” — your steps
“מַדּוּעַ אֶחֱרוּ פַּעֲמֵי מַרְכְּבוֹתָיו” (שופטים ה׳:כ״ח)

Thus, “פַּעֲמֹתָיו” refers to the steps of the kohanim carrying the Aron. This hints to two details:

• The rings were placed in the lower corners, near the base of the Aron.
• The entire length of the Aron separated the two rings, with the kohanim walking between them.

Assuming the Aron’s length ran east–west:

• Two rings were on the north side, one at the eastern end and one at the western end.
• Two rings were on the south side in the same arrangement.
• The kohanim carrying the Aron walked between the rings, facing each other.

The Mishnah teaches:

There were four gold rings attached to it, two on the north and two on the south, into which the staves were inserted, and they were never removed.

25:21 — וְאֶל הָאָרֹן תִּתֵּן אֶת הָעֵדֻת
“And into the ark you shall place the testimony.”

Ramban asks why this command is repeated, since the Torah already said earlier:

“וְנָתַתָּ אֶל הָאָרֹן אֶת הָעֵדֻת” (שמות כ״ה:ט״ז)

Rashi explains that this teaches the order of actions: while the Aron was still without its cover, the testimony should first be placed inside, and only afterward should the kapores be placed on top. This is also the order described when Moshe erected the Mishkan:

“וַיִּתֵּן אֶת הָעֵדֻת אֶל הָאָרֹן”
Then:
“וַיִּתֵּן אֶת הַכַּפֹּרֶת עַל הָאָרֹן” (שמות מ׳:כ׳)

Ramban questions this explanation. If this were the intent of the command, the verse should have meant that after placing the cover, one would then remove it and insert the testimony, since the object is still called an Aron even when covered.

He also asks: why does the next verse repeat the phrase:

“אֲשֶׁר עַל אֲרֹן הָעֵדֻת”
“which are upon the ark of the testimony,”

when it is already clear that the keruvim are above the ark and the kapores?

Ramban therefore explains differently:

Since the Torah commanded that the keruvim be made with wings spread upward, but did not yet explain their purpose or why they were made in that form, the verse now clarifies their role.

The kapores with its keruvim is a single unit above the Aron, and the Aron contains the testimony. This forms a “Kisei Kavod” — a throne of glory — for Hashem. From there:

• He will meet with Moshe,
• Cause His Shechinah to dwell upon Israel,
• And speak from above the kapores, from between the keruvim.

This arrangement corresponds to the Divine chariot seen by Yechezkel:

“הִיא הַחַיָּה אֲשֶׁר רָאִיתִי… וָאֵדַע כִּי כְרוּבִים הֵמָּה” (יחזקאל י׳:כ׳)

Thus Hashem is called:

“יֹשֵׁב הַכְּרוּבִים” (שמואל א׳ ד׳:ד׳)

Because the keruvim spread their wings above as the chariot that bears the Divine Glory, as it says:

“וּלְתַבְנִית הַמֶּרְכָּבָה הַכְּרוּבִים זָהָב… עַל אֲרוֹן בְּרִית ה׳” (דהי״א כ״ח:י״ח)

According to Chazal (חגיגה י״ג:), the keruvim had the form of human beings. The word “כְּרוּבִים” comes from the Aramaic “רַבְיָא,” meaning a child. The letter “כ” is comparative — “like children” — indicating their form.

Their faces were turned toward each other, and they were fashioned as one hammered piece, because:

• They serve as the throne of the Supreme One,
• They shelter the testimony, which is “מִכְתַּב אֱלֹקִים” (שמות ל״ב:ט״ז), the writing of G-d.

This is the meaning of:

“וּלְתַבְנִית הַמֶּרְכָּבָה”
“The pattern of the chariot.”

The keruvim seen by Yechezkel bear the Divine Glory above, and the keruvim of the Mishkan and Mikdash are patterned after them. For:

“גָּבֹהַּ מֵעַל גָּבֹהַּ שֹׁמֵר” (קהלת ה׳:ז׳)

There is always a higher reality beyond what is seen below.

Thus Yechezkel said:

“וָאֵדַע כִּי כְרוּבִים הֵמָּה”
“I knew that they were keruvim.”

He saw one reality and understood the higher one to which it corresponded. The one who understands the deeper wisdom will grasp this mystery.

25:24 — וְעָשִׂיתָ לוֹ זֵר זָהָב סָבִיב
“And you shall make for it a crown of gold around it.”

Ramban cites Rashi, who explains that this golden crown is a symbol of royal authority, because the Shulchan represents wealth and prominence, as the Sages say, “the table of kings.”

Ramban affirms that this is indeed correct, and reveals that this is the deeper secret of the Shulchan. From the time the world was created, the blessing of Hashem does not create something from nothing in the ordinary course of nature. Rather, the world follows its established order, as it is written:

“וַיַּרְא אֱלֹקִים אֶת כָּל אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה וְהִנֵּה טוֹב מְאֹד” (בראשית א׳:ל״א)

However, when there is already a root or starting point for something, the Divine blessing descends upon it and increases it. Ramban brings examples from the Nevi’im:

• Elisha asked the widow:
  “הַגִּידִי לִי מַה יֶּשׁ לָךְ בַּבָּיִת” (מלכים ב׳ ד׳:ב׳)
  The blessing rested upon the small amount of oil she already possessed, and it filled all the vessels.
• In the days of Eliyahu:
  “כַּד הַקֶּמַח לֹא כָלָתָה וְצַפַּחַת הַשֶּׁמֶן לֹא חָסֵר” (מלכים א׳ י״ז:ט״ז)

So too, with the Shulchan and the Lechem HaPanim: the blessing rested upon it, and from there abundance spread to all Israel. For this reason, Chazal said:

Every kohen who received even a small portion of the Lechem HaPanim ate and was satisfied (יומא ל״ט.).

25:29 — וְעָשִׂיתָ קְּעָרֹתָיו וְכַפֹּתָיו וּקְשׂוֹתָיו וּמְנַקִּיֹּתָיו
“And you shall make its dishes, its spoons, its rods, and its supports.”

Ramban first cites Rashi’s explanation:

• “קְּעָרֹתָיו” — the moulds used to shape the loaves.
• “כַפֹּתָיו” — the spoons that held the frankincense.
• “קְשׂוֹתָיו” — rods shaped like half-hollow canes, placed between the loaves so they would not become moldy.
• “מְנַקִּיֹּתָיו” — forked supports with notches, which held up the rods.

These vessels are indeed described in the Gemara (מנחות צ״ז.).

Rashi adds that Onkelos translated “מְנַקִּיֹּתָיו” as “מְכִילָתֵהּ,” meaning “bearers” or “supporters,” from expressions such as:

“וְנִלְאֵיתִי כַּלְכֵּל” (ירמיה כ׳:ט׳)
“נִלְאֵיתִי הָכִיל” (שם ו׳:י״א)

Chazal disagreed about the identification of these terms:

• Some say “קְשׂוֹתָיו” were the supports, and “מְנַקִּיֹּתָיו” were the rods.
• Onkelos, however, seems to follow the view that the “מְנַקִּיֹּת” were the supports.

Ramban rejects this interpretation. He argues that in Aramaic the word “מְכִילָא” refers not to supports, but to measures, such as ephahs and similar units. He demonstrates this from several examples:

• “אֵיפַת צֶדֶק” — translated as “מְכִילָן דִּקְשׁוֹט”
• “לֹא יִהְיֶה לְךָ… אֵיפָה וְאֵיפָה” — translated as “מְכִילְתָא וּמְכִילְתָא”

And from many expressions involving containment or capacity:

• “אַלְפַּיִם בַּת יָכִיל” (מלכים א׳ ז׳:כ״ו)
• “קָטֹן מֵהָכִיל אֶת הָעֹלָה” (מלכים א׳ ח׳:ס״ד)
• “רוּחַ אִישׁ יְכַלְכֵּל מַחֲלֵהוּ” (משלי י״ח:י״ד)

All these indicate holding, containing, or measuring.

Ramban suggests that according to Onkelos, the “מְנַקִּיּוֹת” were measuring vessels. Since each loaf required two tenths of an ephah, perhaps there was a special measuring vessel of that size. This would differ from the Mishnah (מנחות פ״ז), which mentions only two dry measures in the Mikdash: the tenth and the half-tenth.

Ramban then offers what he considers the most correct understanding of Onkelos:

The word “מְכִילָא” refers to the mould used for the dough. Chazal taught (מנחות צ״ד) that three moulds were used for the Lechem HaPanim:

• One mould while the dough was still raw.
• A second mould in the oven.
• A third frame after baking, so the bread would not spoil.

This third frame did not need to match the precise shape and size of the bread; it was more like a dish that supported its sides. This corresponds to the “קְּעָרֹתָיו” mentioned in the verse.

The first mould, however, was shaped exactly to the dimensions of the loaf — ten handbreadths long, five wide, with horns seven fingerbreadths high. The dough was measured and formed within this mould, and therefore it was called “מְכִילָא,” because it was used for measuring.

Accordingly, “מְנַקִּיּוֹת” would be a noun like “אֵיפָה” or “סְאָה,” similar in grammatical form to the other vessel names. Perhaps they were called this because they were honest and exact measures, “clean” from falsehood, removing their owners from cheating and sin.

“קְשׂוֹתָיו,” according to Ramban, is a general term that includes both the rods and the supports. The name may derive from their notched or divided structure, possibly involving a linguistic interchange between the letters צ and ש.

Ibn Ezra claimed that the book of Divrei HaYamim contains an error, because it lists different vessels in connection with the Shulchan. Ramban rejects this. He explains that the verses there are speaking broadly about all the vessels of the Beis HaMikdash, not only the Shulchan. Thus:

• The forks and basins belong to the Mizbeach.
• The jars belong to the Shulchan.
• The bowls belong to the Mizbeach.

The verse then concludes:

“הַכֹּל בִּכְתָב מִיַּד ה׳ עָלַי הִשְׂכִּיל כֹּל מַלְאֲכוֹת הַתַּבְנִית” (דהי״א כ״ח:י״ט)

Meaning that David was given, in writing from Hashem, the entire plan for all the vessels and structures of the Mikdash.

25:30 — וְנָתַתָּ עַל הַשֻּׁלְחָן לֶחֶם פָּנִים לְפָנַי תָּמִיד
“And you shall place upon the table showbread before Me always.”

Ramban cites Rashi, who explains that it is called “לֶחֶם פָּנִים” — “bread of faces” — because the loaves had surfaces that faced both directions toward the sides of the Sanctuary. The loaves were set lengthwise across the width of the table, with their sides standing upright, aligned with the edges of the table. This follows the teaching of the Mishnah, where Ben Zoma explains that it is called “lechem panim” because it had “faces,” meaning surfaces on both sides.

However, Ramban notes that this explanation fits only according to the opinion that the loaves were shaped like an open box. According to the opinion that they were shaped like a rocking boat, this interpretation would not apply, since such loaves would not have parallel upright surfaces.

Ibn Ezra explains more simply that it is called “lechem panim” because it is placed “before Me always” — that is, before Hashem.

Ramban then reveals the deeper, mystical understanding. When one understands the meaning of the phrase “לְפָנַי” — “before Me” — one will understand both the name and the secret of the showbread. Because of this inner meaning, the Shulchan was placed on the northern side of the Mishkan, since:

“בִּרְכַּת ה׳ הִיא תַעֲשִׁיר” (משלי י׳:כ״ב)
“The blessing of Hashem is what enriches.”

And similarly:

“בְּכָל הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר אַזְכִּיר אֶת שְׁמִי אָבוֹא אֵלֶיךָ וּבֵרַכְתִּיךָ” (שמות כ׳:כ״א)
“In every place where I cause My Name to be mentioned, I will come to you and bless you.”

Ramban states that he has already alluded to this secret earlier.

He then turns to the Menorah and notes that the wisdom embodied in its cups, knobs, and flowers is extremely hidden and difficult to grasp. Yet the basic structure is understandable: it was made of a single hammered piece, with six branches emerging from the central shaft, and upon them the “lamp of G-d,” all illuminating toward the center. This structure contains deep meaning, as he has explained elsewhere. This is why Chazal said that Moshe found the construction of the Menorah difficult to comprehend.

25:39 — כִּכָּר זָהָב טָהוֹר יַעֲשֶׂה אֹתָהּ אֵת כָּל הַכֵּלִים הָאֵלֶּה
“Of a talent of pure gold shall he make it, with all these vessels.”

Ramban cites Rashi, who explains that the total weight of the Menorah together with all its vessels had to be exactly one talent — no more and no less.

Ramban raises difficulties with this explanation:

• If the entire weight was one talent, the Torah should have specified how much of that weight belonged to the Menorah itself.
• Otherwise, most of the gold could theoretically be used for the tongs and snuffdishes, leaving little for the Menorah.
• It is also unclear why the Torah would give a combined weight for the Menorah and its separate vessels rather than specifying their individual amounts.

Ramban then cites the teaching of the Sages in Menachos:

• According to Rabbi Yehudah: the Menorah and its lamps came from the talent, but not the tongs and snuffdishes. The phrase “with all these vessels” refers to the lamps.
• According to Rabbi Nechemyah: only the Menorah itself came from the talent, not the lamps, tongs, or snuffdishes. The phrase “with all these vessels” teaches that they were all made of gold, though not from the same talent.

According to Rabbi Yehudah, the lamps were hammered together with the Menorah, yet Scripture still calls them “vessels” because they hold the oil and are considered distinct in name. According to Rabbi Nechemyah, the lamps were not hammered together with the Menorah at all.

Ramban then explains the plain meaning of the verse:

“Of a talent of pure gold shall he make it” — the Menorah itself.
“All these vessels” — the vessels must also be made of pure gold, but not necessarily from that same talent.

Indeed, when the Torah describes the construction, it says:

“וַיַּעַשׂ אֶת נֵרֹתֶיהָ… וּמַלְקָחֶיהָ וּמַחְתֹּתֶיהָ זָהָב טָהוֹר” (שמות ל״ז:כ״ג)

Here, the phrase “pure gold” refers to the tongs and snuffdishes, and then the Torah adds:

“כִּכָּר זָהָב טָהוֹר עָשָׂה אֹתָהּ וְאֵת כָּל כֵּלֶיהָ” (שם כ״ד)

Meaning: the Menorah itself came from the talent, and all its vessels were made of pure gold, though not from that same weight.

The phrase “all its vessels” also includes the oil vessels mentioned later:

“וְאֶת כָּל כְּלֵי שַׁמְנָהּ אֲשֶׁר יְשָׁרְתוּ לָהּ בָּהֶם” (במדבר ד׳:ט׳)

The verse stating:

“עַד יְרֵכָהּ עַד פִּרְחָהּ מִקְשָׁה הִיא” (במדבר ח׳:ד׳)

Indicates, according to the plain meaning, that only the body of the Menorah was of hammered work, not the lamps.

Ramban then cites a Baraisa which teaches differently: the Menorah made by Moshe was of gold, made of hammered work, and included its lamps, lids, and snuffdishes as part of the same beaten piece from the talent. The “melkachayim” were not tongs, but golden covers over the lamps to protect the oil. The “machtos” were small receptacles beneath each lamp to catch sparks.

According to this view:

• The lamps, lids, and snuffdishes were all part of the Menorah itself, beaten from the talent.
• The tongs and other external implements were separate vessels and not from the talent.

Similarly, the cups, knobs, and flowers were not essential to the Menorah’s validity; if it were made of another metal, these features were not required. However, the branches were always essential.

Thus, the phrase “with all its vessels” may refer specifically to those vessels that were part of the Menorah’s structure itself.

In summary, according to all opinions, the body of the Menorah came from the talent of gold, while anything external to it did not come from that talent.

Chapter 25 Summary

In chapter 25, Ramban explains the inner meaning of the Mishkan’s central vessels. The Aron is described as the holiest object, representing the throne of the Shechinah and the resting place of the Divine testimony. Its construction by all of Israel reflects the collective ownership of Torah. The keruvim above the Aron form the symbolic chariot of the Divine Presence, corresponding to the heavenly merkavah seen by the prophets. The Shulchan, crowned with gold, represents material blessing, through which sustenance flows to the world when it rests upon a physical source. The Lechem HaPanim embodies this principle of blessing expanding from an initial point. The Menorah, fashioned from a single piece of gold, represents the hidden wisdom of creation, its form and light hinting at profound spiritual secrets beyond ordinary understanding.

Chapter 26

26:17 — שְׁתֵּי יָדוֹת לַקֶּרֶשׁ הָאֶחָד
“Two tenons shall there be in each board.”

Ramban cites Rashi’s explanation that the lower part of each board was cut out in the middle to the height of one cubit. A quarter of the board’s width was left on each side, forming the two “hands” (tenons), while the middle portion cut away equaled half the width of the board. These tenons were then inserted into the hollow sockets. The sockets were one cubit high and placed side by side, and the tenons were trimmed on three sides so that the boards would fit tightly together without any gap between them.

Ramban on Parshas Terumah – Exo…

Ramban raises a difficulty with this explanation. If the central cut was half the width of the board, and the thickness of the sockets’ rims had to match the remaining quarters, then after cutting away the sides there would be almost nothing left of the tenons themselves. The entire lower portion of the board would be carved away, which seems implausible.

He also questions the proof Rashi brought from the Mishnah describing the construction of the Mishkan. Taken literally, that teaching would imply that a quarter was cut from each side and half from the center, leaving nothing at all from the lower portion of the board.

Ramban therefore explains that the baraita did not intend to specify exact measurements. The Torah itself does not give the thickness of the socket rims. Rather, the teaching means that:

• A portion was cut from one side sufficient to cover the rim of one socket.
• A similar portion was cut from the other side.
• In the middle, enough was cut to cover the combined thickness of the two socket rims.

Thus, the amounts removed were not fixed fractions of the board’s width, but were determined by the size of the sockets.

Even with this understanding, Ramban notes a remaining question: at the bottom, to the height of one cubit, the thickness of the two sockets would reduce the interior width of the Mishkan from the stated ten cubits. Perhaps, he says, this discrepancy is not significant.

Ramban also notes that according to Rashi, the cuts were made within the thickness of the tenons themselves, based on the thickness of the socket rims. This is reasonable, though the baraita does not explicitly mention it.

“מְשֻׁלָּבֹת אִשָּׁה אֶל אֲחֹתָהּ”
“Set one against the other.”

Rashi explains that the tenons were shaped like the rungs of a ladder, aligned exactly opposite one another and fitted into the hollow sockets. They were trimmed evenly so that one would not lean inward and the other outward relative to the board’s thickness.

Ramban notes a grammatical difficulty in this explanation. The word “boards” (קְרָשִׁים) is masculine, so the phrase should have said “אִישׁ אֶל אָחִיו” (one to the other, masculine form). He suggests instead that the feminine expression refers to the “shlivoth” (rungs or pegs), a feminine noun, meaning that the connecting pieces corresponded exactly with one another so that the boards would join evenly.

Ramban then cites another teaching from the baraita of the Mishkan’s construction:

• Two pegs projected from each board.
• Each peg fit into a corresponding hole in the adjacent board.
• This created a dovetail-like system where boards interlocked with one another.

According to this view, the phrase “meshulavoth ishah el achothah” refers not to the tenons inserted into the sockets, but to these interlocking pegs between the boards themselves. Each board had two projections that fit into corresponding recesses in the next board, securing them together.

On the phrase:

“קֵדְמָה מִזְרָחָה”
“On the east side, eastward”

Ramban explains the linguistic structure of directional terms in the Torah:

• “Kedem” means east, from the perspective of a person facing the rising sun.
• “Achor” (back) refers to the west, since one’s back is toward the west when facing east.
• “Negev” (south) means dry or parched, due to the heat.
• “Yam” (sea) refers to the west because the Great Sea lies to the west of Eretz Yisrael.
• “Tzafon” (north) means hidden, because the sun never reaches that side.

Sometimes the Torah uses a descriptive term and then clarifies it with the precise directional name, such as “kedmah” followed by “mizrachah.”

Ramban adds a mystical note: the deeper meaning of these directional names is connected to the secrets of the Divine Chariot. The west, called “yam,” alludes to Torah and Divine wisdom, as the Sages taught that the Shechinah is in the west and that “yam” often symbolizes Torah.

26:24 — וְיַחְדָּו יִהְיוּ תַמִּים עַל רֹאשׁוֹ אֶל הַטַּבַּעַת הָאֶחָת
“And they shall be joined together above the head of it, unto the one ring.”

Ramban cites Rashi’s interpretation that this verse returns to describe all the boards: they were to be fitted together below, where they were cut at their sides, and also joined together above at the top of each board. According to this reading, “unto the one ring” refers to the top of each board, and the phrase “thus shall it be for both of them” refers to the two corner boards.

Ramban raises several questions about this explanation:

• If this is the intent, why does the Torah not explicitly command the making of these rings, saying “you shall make twenty rings of gold”?
• Why does the verse say “unto the one ring” with the definite article, as if it had already been mentioned?

He suggests that perhaps the Torah relied on common building practice. Since it was standard to fasten boards together at the top with a ring, the verse simply refers to “the ring” — the known, customary method. Similarly, the Torah later says regarding the bars:

“וְאֶת טַבְּעֹתֵיהֶם תַּעֲשֶׂה זָהָב”
“And you shall make their rings of gold”

Referring to the usual type of rings used for such structures.

Ramban then cites a teaching from the Baraita of the work of the Mishkan:

• The top of each board was cut away one fingerbreadth on each side.
• The adjacent boards were inserted together into a single gold ring.
• This ensured that the boards would not separate from each other.

The verse states:

“וְיִהְיוּ תֹאֲמִים מִלְּמַטָּה, וְיַחְדָּו יִהְיוּ תַמִּים עַל רֹאשׁוֹ אֶל הַטַּבַּעַת הָאֶחָת”

The Baraita explains that the extra phrase “unto the one ring” teaches that this was the location where the bars were inserted. The cut in the board extended up to the place of the upper ring for the bars.

Scripture was not particular about the exact method of attachment at the top — whether the rings were of silver or gold, fixed or movable, or replaced with connecting rods. However, the Baraita teaches that Moshe made rings for this purpose.

According to the plain meaning of the verse, Ramban concludes that this instruction applies only to the corner boards.

26:33 — וְהֵבֵאתָ שָׁמָּה מִבֵּית לַפָּרֹכֶת אֶת אֲרוֹן הָעֵדוּת
“And you shall bring there, within the veil, the ark of the testimony.”

Ramban explains that the Torah is not here commanding the order of erection — that first the veil should be hung and only afterward the ark brought inside. At this stage, the Torah is giving instructions for the making of the Mishkan, not for its assembly.

Similarly, the verse:

“וְנָתַתָּ אֶת הַכַּפֹּרֶת עַל אֲרוֹן הָעֵדֻת בְּקֹדֶשׁ הַקֳּדָשִׁים” (שמות כ״ו:ל״ד)

Does not mean that the cover should be placed on the ark only after the ark is already inside the Holy of Holies. Rather, the verse teaches the intended arrangement: the veil is to be hung beneath the clasps so that the ark will stand inside the inner chamber, and the veil will separate between the Holy and the Holy of Holies.

Thus, the command indicates the final placement:

• The ark, with the kapores and its keruvim, will be in the Holy of Holies,
• Inside the veil.

However, when the Torah later gives the instructions for the actual erection of the Mishkan, the order is different. There it says:

“וְשַׂמְתָּ שָׁם אֵת אֲרוֹן הָעֵדוּת” (שמות מ׳:ג׳)
“And you shall place there the ark of the testimony.”

And afterward:

“וְסַכֹּתָ עַל הָאָרֹן אֶת הַפָּרֹכֶת”
“And you shall screen the ark with the veil.”

Similarly, in the account of the actual construction:

• “וַיִּתֵּן אֶת הַכַּפֹּרֶת עַל הָאָרֹן מִלְמָעְלָה”
• “וַיָּבֵא אֶת הָאָרוֹן אֶל הַמִּשְׁכָּן”
• And afterward: “וַיָּשֶׂם אֵת פָּרֹכֶת הַמָּסָךְ”

Thus, the earlier verse describes the intended arrangement of the Mishkan, not the sequence of its assembly.

Chapter 26 Summary

In chapter 26, Ramban focuses on the structure of the Mishkan itself, explaining the boards, sockets, rings, bars, and curtains that form its walls and inner chambers. He carefully analyzes the construction details, often questioning Rashi’s interpretations and offering alternative readings grounded in linguistic precision and practical engineering. The interlocking boards and rings show the careful craftsmanship required to create a stable and unified structure. Ramban also explains the placement of the Paroches and the arrangement of the interior, emphasizing that the Torah’s instructions describe the intended spiritual layout rather than the chronological order of assembly. The separation between the Holy and the Holy of Holies reflects the layered structure of sanctity within the Mishkan, with the Aron at its innermost center as the seat of the Divine Presence.

Summary of Ramban on Parshas Terumah

Throughout his commentary on Parshas Terumah, Ramban reveals the Mishkan as both a physical sanctuary and a spiritual system reflecting the structure of creation and the heavenly realms. Every vessel carries meaning: the Aron as the throne of testimony, the keruvim as the Divine chariot, the Shulchan as the source of blessing, and the Menorah as the light of wisdom. The Mishkan’s boards and curtains form not only a structure of wood and fabric, but a carefully ordered space of ascending holiness. In Ramban’s vision, the Mishkan is the earthly counterpart of the celestial realm — a dwelling where the Shechinah rests among Israel and where the revelation of Sinai becomes a permanent presence in the heart of the nation.

📖 Source

• Ramban on Terumah: 25:1-26:33

Sforno on Parshas Terumah – Commentary

Introduction to Sforno on Parshas Terumah

Sforno approaches the Mishkan as a spiritual and intellectual model of the world and of the human soul. The structure, its vessels, and its arrangement are not only practical or ceremonial, but educational: each component teaches a principle about the ascent of the human intellect, the harmony between theory and practice, and the ordered hierarchy of holiness. The Mishkan becomes a symbolic cosmos in miniature, guiding Yisrael toward knowledge of Hashem, inner integrity, and the gradual attainment of spiritual perfection. 

Chapter 25

25:2 — “דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְיִקְחוּ לִי תְּרוּמָה”

“Speak to the children of Israel, and let them take for Me a portion.”

Sforno explains that the command was directed to the leaders of Israel to organize the collection. The Torah does not specify who should “take” the contributions; therefore, Moshe was to instruct the official stewards—identified as the Sanhedrin—to gather the donations. This is reflected later, when Moshe addressed “all the congregation of the children of Israel” (שמות לה:ד), meaning the Sanhedrin, and commanded them to collect the contributions.

However, the people did not wait for this organized collection. They came forward immediately and brought such abundant donations that Moshe had to restrain them (שמות לו:ה). As a result, nothing was left for the tribal princes to contribute except the gemstones for the choshen and the oils for the anointing.

Sforno further explains the phrase “מֵאֵת כָּל אִישׁ” — “from every man”:

The collection was not to be taken by force, as in the case of taxes or compulsory charity assessments. Rather, the donations were to come only from willing volunteers.

25:3 — “וְזֹאת הַתְּרוּמָה”

“And this is the contribution.”

Sforno explains that the word “זֹאת” indicates exclusivity: only the materials listed were acceptable. Substitutes of equal value were not to be accepted.

Examples include:

• Perishable goods
• Pearls or gemstones not suitable for the choshen
• Any item not directly usable in the Mishkan’s construction

Only materials that could be incorporated into the Mishkan or its vessels were accepted. The contributions therefore consisted of the thirteen specified materials that directly served the sacred structure and its functions.

25:8–9 — “וְשָׁכַנְתִּי בְּתוֹכָם… כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מַרְאֶה אוֹתְךָ”

“And I will dwell among them… according to all that I show you.”

Sforno explains that the Mishkan was designed so that Hashem would dwell among Yisrael in a manner similar to how His presence had been revealed on Har Sinai. The Shechinah would be manifest above the kapores, between the two keruvim, as part of the entire structure of the Mishkan and its vessels.

The Mishkan’s structure reflects a system of ascending levels of holiness, paralleling the heavenly order perceived by prophets. Just as the prophet Yeshayahu saw the seraphim standing above the Divine throne (ישעיהו ו:ב), the Mishkan’s inner arrangement leads toward the keruvim in the innermost sanctum, suggesting that the Shechinah resides at the highest level.

The Mishkan thus contains progressively more sacred zones, each restricting access, reflecting ascending levels of holiness. These levels are not sealed off, but connected, demonstrating that sanctity can be attained step by step.

Within the Kodesh HaKodashim:

• The Torah rests in the aron, a wooden chest plated with gold inside and out.
• This symbolizes the teaching of Chazal: a Torah scholar whose outward conduct does not match his inner character is not a true scholar (יומא עב:).
• The aron represents the union of inner and outer integrity.

On top of the aron rests the kapores, made entirely of pure gold:

• This represents the image of G-d, the tzelem Elokim.
• The kapores is not physically attached to the aron, symbolizing that at the highest level of holiness, one transcends physicality and material constraints.

The keruvim on top of the kapores:

• Face one another, representing the interaction between the spiritual message of the Torah and the human being who studies it.
• Their faces are turned toward the kapores, toward the Torah beneath it.
• Their wings spread upward, symbolizing spiritual ascent.

This reflects the verse:
“אֹרַח חַיִּים לְמַעְלָה לְמַשְׂכִּיל” — “For the intelligent, the path of life is upward” (משלי טו:כד).

Through such devotion to Torah, one merits Divine attention, as the prophet states:
“וְאֶל זֶה אַבִּיט” — “To this one I will look” (ישעיהו סו:ב).

Sforno then explains the phrase “וְכֵן תַּעֲשׂוּ” — “And so shall you do”:

Hashem would dwell among them through the Mishkan in order to speak with Moshe and to receive the prayers and service of Yisrael. This represents a diminished state compared to the condition before the sin of the Eigel, when Hashem had promised:
“בְּכָל הַמָּקוֹם… אָבֹא אֵלֶיךָ וּבֵרַכְתִּיךָ” (שמות כ:כא) — that His presence would be accessible everywhere.

25:12 — “פַּעֲמֹתָיו… וּשְׁתֵּי טַבָּעוֹת עַל צַלְעוֹ הָאֶחָת”

“And its corners… and two rings on one side.”

Sforno explains that “פעמותיו” refers to the outer corners of the ark.

The term “צלע” refers to the longer side of the ark. Therefore:

• Four rings were to be attached at the four corners.
• These rings were to be placed on the long sides, not on the short sides.

Two rings were placed on one long side and two on the other long side.

Sforno notes that this explanation contradicts the interpretations of Rashi and Rashbam.

25:16 — “וְנָתַתָּ אֶל הָאָרֹן”

“And you shall place into the ark.”

Sforno explains that the Torah specifies this because the ark was not a vessel intended for sacrificial service. It had no role in the offering of korbanos; its function was entirely distinct, as the repository of the Torah.

25:20 — “וְהָיוּ הַכְּרוּבִים”

“And the cherubs shall be…”

Sforno explains that the prophets described angels appearing in prophetic visions as keruvim—beings with human faces and wings. Though they appeared in physical form, they represented purely intellectual, disembodied intelligences.

Their movement is always upward, symbolizing their orientation toward Hashem. Each appears according to its rank within the celestial hierarchy.

The keruvim with outstretched wings represent the aspiration of the human intellect toward union with its Divine source. The human intellect begins as potential and must be perfected through:

• Acquiring universal intellectual principles
• Abstracting them from material considerations
• Using them to understand the Creator as far as humanly possible

This understanding is achieved by:

• Observing the manifestations of Hashem in the world
• Studying His attributes through His actions
• Recognizing when and why He intervenes in history through miracles

Such knowledge allows the prophet to understand the conditions under which Divine providence is revealed.

This is what Moshe requested when he said:
“הוֹדִיעֵנִי נָא אֶת דְּרָכֶךָ וְאֵדָעֲךָ” (שמות לג:יג) — “Show me Your ways, that I may know You.”

The keruvim were described as male and female:

• The male symbolizes the generation of abstract principles.
• The female symbolizes the reception and internalization of those principles.

Their faces turned toward one another symbolize the harmony between:

• The initiation of intellectual insight
• Its acceptance and integration into the human realm

Only through this union can perfection be achieved on earth.

Although their wings are spread upward—indicating that inspiration originates in heaven—their faces are directed downward toward the kapores, toward the Torah. This teaches that understanding Hashem is achieved through studying His revealed Torah, which is stored in the aron.

The symbolism of the keruvim teaches that the key to attaining these insights is Torah study. By giving the Torah and allowing the construction of the Mishkan, Hashem provided the means for mankind to ascend intellectually and spiritually.

25:21 — “וְנָתַתָּ אֶת הַכַּפֹּרֶת עַל הָאָרוֹן… וְאֶל הָאָרוֹן תִּתֵּן אֶת הָעֵדֻת”

“And you shall place the kapores upon the ark from above, and into the ark you shall place the testimony.”

Sforno explains that the process of intellectual perception, the formation of universal principles, and the abstraction of these principles from material considerations all come about through contemplation and disciplined preparation. Only through such effort can a person internalize these truths as a true acquisition.

All of this is attained by focusing on the testimony placed within the aron beneath the kapores. The testimony—namely the Aseres HaDibros—contains the foundational principles of both the intellectual and the practical dimensions of human perfection. The ark, crowned by the kapores above it, thus represents the means through which a person reaches this intended goal.

25:22 — “וְנוֹעַדְתִּי לְךָ שָׁם וְדִבַּרְתִּי אִתְּךָ”

“And I will meet with you there, and I will speak with you.”

Sforno explains that this place—the area above the aron and beneath the keruvim—is where the Shechinah would dwell and where Hashem would communicate with Moshe as intimately as is possible for a human being.

This fulfills the earlier statement:
“וְשָׁכַנְתִּי בְּתוֹכָם… כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מַרְאֶה אוֹתָךְ” (שמות כה:ח–ט),
and the concluding phrase: “וְכֵן תַּעֲשׂוּ” (שם).

Sforno explains that this principle extends beyond the Mishkan itself. Wherever the sages of the generation direct their efforts toward intellectual understanding of Hashem, the Shechinah dwells among them. This includes the profound studies known as מעשה מרכבה—the relationship between the physical and metaphysical realms. When such studies are pursued for the sake of serving Hashem, the Shechinah assists, and even the ministering angels accompany the scholars, as stated by Chazal (חגיגה יד:).

25:23 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ שֻׁלְחָן”

“And you shall make a table.”

After the aron—which symbolized Hashem’s throne on earth, as implied by the words “וְנוֹעַדְתִּי לְךָ שָׁם”—the Torah commands the construction of the shulchan and the menorah. These function like the furnishings of a guest chamber prepared for a dignitary, as seen in the account of the Shunamis woman who prepared a room for the prophet Elisha with a bed, table, chair, and lamp (מלכים ב ד:י).

Chazal teach (יומא עב:) that the crown-like border around the table symbolizes the crown of kingship. The role of a king in governing a state has two primary aspects:

• Establishing and maintaining justice and civil order
• Protecting the state from enemies

This is reflected in the people’s request for a king:
“וּשְׁפָטָנוּ מַלְכֵּנוּ… וְנִלְחַם אֶת מִלְחֲמוֹתֵנוּ” (שמואל א ח:כ).

Accordingly, the shulchan had two “crowns”:

• One crown around the table itself, symbolizing the provision of sustenance and the orderly conduct of the state
• A second crown around the frame, symbolizing the protective barrier that defends the people from harm and destroys their enemies

Sforno notes that this interpretation differs from Rashi, who maintains that there was only one such crown.

25:29 — “קְּעָרֹתָיו וְכַפֹּתָיו”

“Its bowls and its spoons.”

Sforno explains that these vessels were types commonly used at royal banquets, fitting the shulchan’s symbolism as part of a royal setting.

25:31 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ מְנֹרַת זָהָב טָהוֹר”

“And you shall make a menorah of pure gold.”

After establishing two symbolic “crowns”:

• The crown of Torah, represented by the aron
• The crown of kingship, represented by the shulchan

the Torah introduces the menorah.

The menorah was to be made from a single piece of gold, and the light of all its lamps was to converge into one central direction. The flames on the right and left were to incline toward the central lamp.

Since the lights symbolize spiritual enlightenment, this arrangement teaches that in all pursuits of wisdom and spiritual growth, a person must keep the ultimate goal in focus: becoming a better servant of Hashem.

The lights on both sides represent two aspects of intellectual and moral development:

• Theoretical knowledge and ethical understanding
• Practical application of those teachings

Both must serve the central lamp—the נר המערבי—which faces the Shechinah. Only by directing all pursuits toward this central spiritual goal can the other lights continue to burn properly.

This idea is expressed in the verse:
“בְּהַעֲלֹתְךָ אֶת הַנֵּרֹת אֶל מוּל פְּנֵי הַמְּנוֹרָה יָאִירוּ שִׁבְעַת הַנֵּרֹת” (במדבר ח:ב–ד).

The menorah, though appearing to contain multiple lights, is made from a single piece of gold, symbolizing unity. Its many lights ultimately serve one unified purpose.

25:37 — “וְהֵאִיר עַל עֵבֶר פָּנֶיהָ”

“And it shall give light toward its face.”

Sforno reiterates that the lights on the right and left sides were to be directed toward the central lamp.

This teaches that intellectual light must function in both domains:

• The contemplative, theoretical realm
• The practical, behavioral realm

Both must be directed toward the higher spiritual light, serving Hashem with unified purpose. When all lights are directed toward one goal, true illumination emerges from the great source of light.

This idea is again expressed in the command:
“בְּהַעֲלֹתְךָ אֶת הַנֵּרֹת… וְזֶה מַעֲשֵׂה הַמְּנוֹרָה מִקְשָׁה” (במדבר ח:ב–ד),
teaching that although many lights appear, their purpose is one, just as the menorah itself was formed from a single unified piece.

Chapter 25 Summary

In Chapter 25, Sforno presents the Mishkan as a system designed to elevate the human being through voluntary devotion, intellectual refinement, and moral integrity. The donations must be freely given, and only materials directly serving the sacred structure are accepted, emphasizing purposeful holiness. The aron, kapores, and keruvim together symbolize the inner and outer unity of the Torah scholar, the ascent of the intellect toward Hashem, and the harmony between spiritual inspiration and human understanding. The shulchan represents the ordered governance and sustenance of the nation, while the menorah embodies the unification of theoretical wisdom and practical conduct, all directed toward the central light of Divine service. 

Chapter 26

26:1 — “וְאֶת הַמִּשְׁכָּן תַּעֲשֶׂה”

“And you shall make the Mishkan.”

Sforno explains that the curtains themselves are called the Mishkan because within the space they enclosed stood the primary furnishings of a dwelling: the aron, the shulchan, and the menorah. This structure served as the residence of the Shechinah.

The curtains were woven with figures of keruvim. These correspond to the angelic beings seen by the prophets in their visions, such as the seraphim described by Yeshayahu (ישעיהו ו:ב) and the heavenly host standing beside Hashem as described by the prophet Michayah (מלכים א כב:יט). The woven keruvim therefore reflect the celestial realm as perceived in prophetic vision.

26:3 — “חֲמֵשׁ הַיְרִיעֹת תִּהְיֶיןָ חֹבְרֹת”

“Five curtains shall be joined together.”

Sforno explains that the decorative patterns of the curtains were to correspond to one another, each curtain matching its counterpart. This arrangement distinguished between the curtains covering the Kodesh and those covering the Kodesh HaKodashim.

Although both sets of curtains bore images of keruvim—symbolizing spiritual, disembodied intelligences—they differed in their patterns. This difference alluded to the differing levels of sanctity between the two sections of the Mishkan.

26:6 — “וְהָיָה הַמִּשְׁכָּן אֶחָד”

“And the Mishkan shall be one.”

Even though the different sections of the Mishkan represented differing levels of sanctity, they were all arranged together in one unified structure to fulfill the will of their Creator.

This unity is comparable to the description of the angels in Yeshayahu’s vision, where different groups call to one another, proclaiming the holiness of Hashem:
“וְקָרָא זֶה אֶל זֶה וְאָמַר קָדוֹשׁ” (ישעיהו ו:ג).

26:7 — “לְאֹהֶל עַל הַמִּשְׁכָּן”

“For a tent over the Mishkan.”

Sforno explains that the Mishkan itself was not intended primarily as a tent-like shelter. Rather, its essential purpose was that the keruvim would surround the Shechinah, symbolically encircling the Divine presence.

26:9 — “וְחִבַּרְתָּ אֶת חֲמֵשׁ הַיְרִיעֹת לְבָד”

“And you shall join the five curtains separately.”

Sforno explains that even within the Mishkan, there were different levels of sanctity. This is analogous to the structure of the heavens, where various celestial spheres or forces exist at differing distances and ranks, each contributing to the orderly functioning of the universe.

He compares this to the verse:
“לַשֶּׁמֶשׁ שָׂם אֹהֶל בָּהֶם” (תהלים יט:ה),
which describes the sun as set within a “tent” among the celestial bodies. Though each sphere differs in its function and distance, all together proclaim the handiwork of Hashem.

26:15 — “עֲצֵי שִׁטִּים עֹמְדִים”

“Acacia boards standing upright.”

Sforno explains that the boards were to stand vertically, not laid horizontally one atop another as is customary in ordinary buildings. This distinguished the Mishkan from secular structures.

26:24 — “אֶל הַטַּבַּעַת הָאֶחָת”

“To the one ring.”

Sforno explains that the rings were placed at the thickness of the corner boards. These rings aligned with the rings on the side boards, both at the upper and lower levels.

The bars were inserted through:

• The rings in the corner boards
• The rings of the side boards above and below

Through this arrangement, the western wall was securely joined to the northern and southern walls, giving the structure stability.

26:29 — “וְאֶת טַבְּעֹתֵיהֶם”

“And their rings.”

Sforno explains that, by default, bolts are inserted through rings unless the Torah specifies otherwise. This is why the central bar is described differently, as passing “within the boards” (בְּתוֹךְ הַקְּרָשִׁים), meaning it ran inside them rather than through external rings.

26:35 — “וְשַׂמְתָּ אֶת הַשֻּׁלְחָן מִחוּץ לַפָּרֹכֶת”

“And you shall place the table outside the curtain.”

After the aron was placed within the Kodesh HaKodashim, a curtain was arranged to separate it from the other furnishings. Outside this curtain stood the shulchan and the menorah, positioned before the “throne” represented by the aron.

The menorah was placed on the right and the shulchan on the left (from the perspective of one entering the sanctuary). This arrangement reflects the verse:
“אֹרֶךְ יָמִים בִּימִינָהּ, בִּשְׂמֹאולָהּ עֹשֶׁר וְכָבוֹד”
“Length of days is in her right hand; in her left, riches and honor” (משלי ג:טז).

Chapter 26 Summary

In Chapter 26, Sforno explains the structure of the Mishkan itself as a reflection of the heavenly order. The curtains, woven with images of keruvim, mirror the celestial beings seen in prophetic visions, suggesting that the Mishkan is a terrestrial parallel to the Divine throne. Though the Mishkan contains sections of differing sanctity, they are unified into one structure, reflecting the harmonious order of the heavenly hosts. The arrangement of boards, curtains, and connecting bars demonstrates that all levels of holiness are linked together in an ordered ascent toward the innermost sanctuary, where the Shechinah dwells. 

Chapter 27

27:2 — “קַרְנֹתָיו”

“Its horns.”

Sforno explains that the horns were a standard feature of all altars. Just as the altar required horns, so too it required the associated implements—such as the shovels and the basins used for handling the blood. These elements were typical components of altar service.

27:5 — “כַּרְכֹּב הַמִּזְבֵּחַ”

“The ledge of the altar.”

Sforno explains that such a ledge was a normal feature of wooden vessels. Chazal describe these as unfinished wooden vessels, which are not susceptible to ritual impurity, as long as they are not yet suitable for their intended function (חולין כה.). The altar’s ledge reflects this structural feature common to wooden implements.

27:8 — “נְבוּב לֻחֹת… כַּאֲשֶׁר הֶרְאָה אוֹתְךָ בָּהָר”

“Hollow with boards… as you were shown on the mountain.”

Sforno explains that the altar was constructed like a hollow box, without a base or cover.

When the people encamped, this hollow interior was filled with earth. Upon this earth, the altar fire would be kindled and maintained continuously, as described:
“אֵשׁ תָּמִיד תּוּקַד” (ויקרא ו:ו).

27:9 — “מֵאָה בָאַמָּה וְעַמּוּדָיו עֶשְׂרִים”

“One hundred cubits, with its twenty pillars.”

Sforno explains that the spacing between the pillars was such that each interval, including one pillar, measured five cubits.

However, the twenty pillars on the north side and the twenty pillars on the south side were not positioned in a perfectly straight alignment with one another. The pillars at the corners, where the sides met the eastern and western sections, were set in such a way that the layout formed proper right angles. Because of this arrangement, it would have been impossible for every pillar to be exactly five cubits apart from its counterpart across the courtyard, since that would have exceeded the total perimeter measurement.

“וַחֲשֻׁקֵיהֶם”

“And their bands.”

Sforno explains that these were circular decorative bands placed around the pillars at their midpoint, serving as ornamentation.

27:19 — “לְכֹל כְּלֵי הַמִּשְׁכָּן בְּכָל עֲבוֹדָתוֹ”

“For all the vessels of the Mishkan in all its service.”

Sforno explains that this refers to the tools required for the various tasks associated with the Mishkan’s service, such as hammers, mallets, and other instruments needed during its dismantling and reassembly.

Chapter 27 Summary

In Chapter 27, Sforno turns to the outer courtyard and the altar, emphasizing the practical and structural aspects of the Mishkan’s service. The altar’s horns and implements reflect the standard features of sacrificial service, while its hollow, earth-filled structure underscores its connection to the earthly realm. The layout of the courtyard pillars demonstrates careful order and proportional design, and even the decorative bands serve the aesthetic harmony of the structure. The inclusion of the various tools needed for assembly and service shows that every practical element is part of the sacred system, integrating craftsmanship, order, and worship into one unified structure. 

Summary of Sforno on Parshas Terumah

Sforno portrays the Mishkan as a philosophical and spiritual blueprint for human perfection. Its voluntary contributions cultivate generosity; its vessels represent the crowns of Torah and kingship; its menorah symbolizes the unification of thought and action; and its layered structure reflects the ordered hierarchy of holiness in the universe. From the inner sanctum of the aron to the outer courtyard of the altar, the entire Mishkan forms a unified system designed to draw Yisrael upward—through Torah, disciplined intellect, and practical service—toward knowledge of Hashem and the presence of the Shechinah among them. 

📖 Source

• Sforno on Terumah: 25:2-27:19

Abarbanel on Parshas Terumah – Commentary

Introduction to Abarbanel on Parshas Terumah

Abarbanel approaches Parshas Terumah as a carefully structured philosophical and theological presentation, not merely a set of architectural instructions. He begins by posing a series of fundamental questions: Why would the Infinite command a dwelling? How can keruvim be permitted after the prohibition of images? Why is the Mishkan described in an order that seems structurally illogical? These questions frame his entire commentary.

Throughout the parsha, Abarbanel moves between several explanatory layers. He presents earlier philosophical and symbolic interpretations of the Mishkan, then develops his own system, and finally returns to the straightforward meaning of the text. In his reading, the Mishkan is not only a physical sanctuary but a symbolic model of human life, society, and the spiritual journey. Its vessels, structure, and courtyard form a descending order from the Torah at the center of existence to the material world at its outer edge. The commands of the Mishkan are therefore arranged not according to construction logic, but according to spiritual significance.

Chapter 25

25:1 — “וַיְדַבֵּר ה׳ אֶל־מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר”

Abarbanel explains pshat in 4 segments:

1. 10 Questions
2. Answer Part I (Purpose of Mishkan & Terumah)
3. Answer Part II (Materials & Stones)
4. Answer Part III (Symbolism, Prophecy, Shechinah)

Abarbanel’s 10 questions

וידבר ה׳ אל משה לאמר דבר אל בני ישראל ויקחו לי תרומה וגו׳ עד סוף הסדר. ויש לשאול בסדר הזה שאלות:

Abarbanel begins by noting that from the opening command of the parsha—“דבר אל בני ישראל ויקחו לי תרומה”—until the end of the section, there are many matters that require investigation. He therefore presents a structured series of questions that frame the entire discussion of the Mishkan and its vessels.

השאלה הא׳ (Question 1)
Why did the Blessed One command the construction of the Mishkan and say “ושכנתי בתוכם,” as though He were a physical being confined to a place? This seems contrary to the truth, for He is not a body and not a force within a body. How then can a place be attributed to Him? He Himself declared, “השמים כסאי והארץ הדום רגלי אי זה בית אשר תבנו לי ואי זה מקום מנוחתי” (ישעיה ס״ו:א׳), and likewise Shlomo said at the dedication of the Beis HaMikdash, “הנה השמים ושמי השמים לא יכלכלוך אף כי הבית הזה אשר בניתי” (מלכים א׳ ח:כ״ז). These statements appear to contradict the command to build a dwelling for Him.

השאלה הב׳ (Question 2)
Regarding the Keruvim that were commanded to be placed upon the Kapores: does this not violate the prohibition, “לא תעשה לך פסל וכל תמונה אשר בשמים ממעל ואשר בארץ מתחת” (שמות כ:ד׳)? How could they be commanded to make what they had just been warned against?

השאלה הג׳ (Question 3)
Concerning the Shulchan and the Lechem HaPanim: what purpose was served by placing twelve loaves upon the table, with frankincense among them, and forbidding their consumption throughout the week until the seventh day? Was this for a Divine need? Surely the bread was not eaten there, and Hashem requires nothing, for He gives bread to all flesh. Indeed, the author of the Moreh Nevuchim admitted that he did not know the reason for the Shulchan and the Lechem HaPanim.

השאלה הד׳ (Question 4)
Regarding the Menorah: it was commanded that its lamps be lit morning and evening. The Moreh wrote that this was for the honor and beauty of the House, for it is more splendid when illuminated than when in darkness. But if the lighting were only at night, this reasoning would be understandable. What beauty is achieved by lighting lamps during the day, when the sun shines brightly? They provide no assistance or benefit. Furthermore, no reason was given for the six branches, the cups, knobs, and flowers.

השאלה הה׳ (Question 5)
Regarding the Mizbeach HaKetores in the Heichal, between the Shulchan and the Menorah: what need was there for it? The Moreh wrote that it served to remove the odor of slaughtered meat offered upon the outer altar. But this is not plausible. If this were the purpose, the incense should have been burned in the courtyard near the place of slaughter, not in the Heichal where no meat was present. All the more so in the Kodesh HaKodashim, where the Kohen Gadol would bring incense on Yom Kippur—surely there was no odor of slaughtered meat there.

השאלה הו׳ (Question 6)
Concerning the Paroches and the Masach, both mentioned as dividers of the Mishkan: since both served to separate spaces and were made of the same materials—תכלת, ארגמן, תולעת שני, ושש משזר—why were they different in other respects? The Paroches was made “מעשה חושב כרובים,” while the Masach was only “מעשה רוקם,” without the design of Keruvim. Additionally, the Paroches had four silver sockets, while the Masach had five copper sockets.

השאלה הז׳ (Question 7)
Regarding the Mizbeach HaOlah: why was it made without silver or gold, unlike the other vessels, and instead constructed entirely of copper? The incense altar, by contrast, was made of pure gold. Furthermore, why did the outer altar have a copper mesh beneath its ledge, reaching halfway up its height—something not found in the incense altar?

השאלה הח׳ (Question 8)
Regarding the courtyard: the sockets were copper, but the hooks and bands of the pillars were silver. Why was it not entirely of silver or entirely of copper? After all, the incense altar was entirely gold, and the outer altar entirely copper.

השאלה הט׳ (Question 9)
Why were the commands for the Mishkan and its vessels given in an order different from the order of their actual arrangement and construction? In practice, the Mishkan was assembled first—its curtains, boards, pillars, sockets, and bars. Then inside, in the innermost chamber, the Aron and Kapores with the Keruvim were placed. After them came the Paroches, separating the Kodesh from the Kodesh HaKodashim. Then in the Heichal stood the Shulchan, Menorah, and incense altar, followed by the entrance screen, and then the courtyard with the outer altar and laver. Finally, the priestly garments were made.

This same order appears:

• In Parshas Vayakhel, where Moshe commands the people
• In Parshas Pekudei, where the artisans present the completed work
• In the Divine command to erect the Mishkan
• In the actual erection of the Mishkan

If so, why were the original commands not given in this order? Instead, the sequence appears disordered in twelve specific ways, including:

• Beginning with the Aron instead of the Mishkan
• Delaying mention of the Paroches
• Mentioning the Shulchan and Menorah without the separating curtain
• Placing the Mishkan after the vessels
• Delaying the entrance screen
• Separating related items
• Delaying the laver
• Inserting the oil for lighting before completing the vessels
• Commanding the priestly garments before finishing the Mishkan
• Placing the incense altar at the end of Tetzaveh
• Mentioning the half-shekel before the laver
• Mentioning the laver only later in Ki Sisa

This appears as a great lack of order in the Divine commands, and Abarbanel expresses astonishment at the seeming disorder.

השאלה הי׳ (Question 10)
Why were all the commands of the Mishkan included within a single Divine speech—“וידבר ה׳ אל משה לאמר דבר אל בני ישראל ויקחו לי תרומה”—encompassing so many commands and instructions? Yet in Parshas Ki Sisa, each command is introduced with a separate “וידבר ה׳ אל משה לאמר.” There, six matters are presented with six distinct Divine utterances.

Ordinarily, multiple Divine speeches are used for one of three reasons:

• A break in time between them
• A change of subject
• The elevated importance of a particular command

But none of these apply here. All the commands of Terumah and Tetzaveh were given at the same time, concerned the same subject—the Mishkan and its vessels—and were of the highest importance, including the Aron, Shulchan, Menorah, and incense altar. Yet they were all included in a single speech. Why was this so?

Abarbanel concludes this section by stating that this is a significant and worthy inquiry, and he now proceeds to explain the pesukim in a manner that will resolve all the questions.

Answer Part I (Purpose of Mishkan & Terumah)

25:1 — “וַיְדַבֵּר ה׳ אֶל־מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר”

וידבר ה׳ אל משה לאמר וגו׳ ויקחו לי תרומה עד ועשו ארון עצי שטים.

Abarbanel now begins his resolution of the questions by explaining the essential purpose of the Mishkan and the nature of the command to take the terumah.

When the Holy One, blessed be He, desired to grant merit to Israel and to elevate the stature of Moshe His servant—by leading them personally and not through the intermediary of an angel, as had previously been mentioned—He commanded them to construct a Mikdash. Through this sanctuary, His Shechinah would dwell among them, and the Divine glory would rest upon the Aron just as it had rested upon Har Sinai. From that place, the Divine voice and speech would again issue forth to Moshe, just as it had at Sinai.

Therefore, Moshe was commanded to tell the people that they should appoint treasurers and collectors of charity, who would gather contributions for the sake of Hashem. Each individual was to separate from his possessions and wealth according to the generosity of his heart.

Within the expression “ויקחו לי תרומה,” Abarbanel identifies four fundamental intentions.

• First: The people should not think that only the princes or leaders of the nation would supply the materials for the Mishkan. Rather, every individual—great or small—should participate, for from every person whose heart moved him, a contribution would be accepted.
• Second: No one should be compelled or forced to give. The contribution must come willingly, from the inner generosity of the giver, not through coercion.
• Third: The collectors themselves were not to pressure or solicit donations. The people would bring their offerings on their own initiative. Thus the verse states, “מאת כל איש אשר ידבנו לבו תקחו את תרומתי”—you shall take My offering from whoever is moved by his heart, not by asking or extracting it from him.
• Fourth: Even if someone wished to give all his possessions, they were not to accept such an offering. Excessive self-impoverishment is not a virtue but a deficiency. Chazal taught (כתובות ס״ו) that in Usha they established a rule that one should not give away more than a fifth of one’s wealth. Thus the verse emphasizes “אשר ידבנו לבו,” meaning a measured, balanced generosity, not reckless expenditure. For this reason the offering is called “תרומה,” which can be understood as “תרי ממאה”—a proportioned portion, like the terumah given from produce.

For these reasons, the Torah repeats the expression “תקחו את תרומתי”—you shall take My offering—meaning the portion set aside for My sake. Sometimes a thing is attributed to the one who performs it, and sometimes to the one who receives it. Thus, prayer is called both “תפלתי” (תהלים ס״ט:י״ד) when referring to the one who prays, and also “בית תפלתי” (ישעיה נ״ו:ז׳) when referring to the place where it is received by Hashem.

The verse then continues, “וזאת התרומה אשר תקחו מאתם,” to clarify that only the specified materials were to be accepted. If someone offered other items—such as iron, lead, garments, or unrelated goods—these were not to be taken. Hashem did not desire that people give whatever happened to be available, like salvaging from a fire. Only those materials truly needed for the Mishkan were to be accepted.

The materials are then listed in order of importance.

• First come the metals: זהב, כסף, ונחשת.
  
  • Gold was used for the sacred vessels.
  • Silver was used for service vessels and for the sockets.
  • Copper was used for the outer altar and its utensils.

Some interpreted these metals as intended for coinage, but Abarbanel rejects this, because the Mishkan was constructed entirely from voluntary donations. The half-shekel was only later required because the donated silver proved insufficient for the large number of sockets.

Next come the dyed materials: תכלת, ארגמן, and תולעת שני.
Ralbag suggested these were dyed wool, but Abarbanel rejects this. The Torah refers to wool as “עזים.” Rather, these were types of silk:

• תכלת: silk dyed the color of the sea.
• ארגמן: silk dyed red.
• תולעת שני: a naturally beautiful silk, without added dye.

שש refers to Egyptian linen, of especially fine quality. When six threads are twisted together, it is called שש or שש משזר. A single strand is called בד, meaning something solitary.

עזים refers to the soft under-fleece of goats, which grows beneath the coarse outer hair. This material was especially prized in Egypt and in eastern lands, where goat hair was superior to sheep’s wool.

The Torah then mentions עורות אלים מאדמים, the skins of rams dyed red, and עורות תחשים. Chazal taught that the tachash was a special animal that existed in those days, possessing many colors. Ralbag suggested that these were the skins of large goats, strong and durable, suitable for footwear, as implied by the verse “ואנעלך תחש” (יחזקאל ט״ז:י׳).

Next are עצי שטים, a type of cedar wood—thick yet lightweight. The Midrash states that Yaakov planted these trees in Egypt, but Abarbanel considers it unlikely that they were transported through the sea. Ibn Ezra suggested that such trees grew near Har Sinai, and Moshe cut them. Abarbanel proposes a third approach: merchants from surrounding lands came to the Israelite camp, and from them the people purchased the wood, oil, and spices. It is unreasonable to assume that all these materials were carried out of Egypt.

Thus, the command for the terumah was not simply a collection of materials. It was a carefully structured act of voluntary giving, designed to involve the entire nation, cultivate measured generosity, and prepare the physical and spiritual foundations for the dwelling of the Shechinah among Israel.

Answer Part II (Materials & Stones)

וזאת התרומה אשר תקחו מאתם…

Abarbanel continues his explanation of the materials listed for the Mishkan, turning especially to the precious stones and their meaning.

After describing the metals, fabrics, animal products, and woods, the Torah mentions:

אבני שוהם ואבני מלאים לאפוד ולחשן

The shoham stones were two stones designated for the ephod, while the filling stones were for the breastplate. Abarbanel now examines the meaning of the term אבני מלואים.

Rashi explained that they were called “אבני מלואים” because a golden setting, like a hollow socket, was made, and the stone filled that cavity. The recess itself was called a משבצת, and the stone that filled it was therefore called a “stone of filling.”

Ramban, however, disagreed with Rashi and argued that “אבני מלואים” meant stones that were naturally whole, not cut from a quarry or shaped by human tools. According to him, they were complete as created.

Abarbanel rejects both views.

He argues against Ramban’s explanation by noting that precious stones must be cut from quarries. When they are first extracted, they lack brilliance and form. They must necessarily be cut, polished, and shaped in order to acquire their proper form and radiance. It is therefore impossible that they remained in their original natural state.

Moreover, the stones of the breastplate had the names of the tribes engraved upon them. This engraving could not be accomplished without removing some material. Even if the engraving was done by the shamir, as Chazal describe, it would still remove portions of the stone in the process.

Chazal in מסכת סוטה (מ״ח) taught that the stones were not written upon with ink, and no iron tool was used. Instead, the shamir was brought and shown to the stones, and they split on their own. This, however, only indicates that iron tools were not used; it does not mean that the stones remained in their original untouched state. Parts of the stone were still removed in the engraving.

Abarbanel therefore offers his own explanation.

The shoham stones of the ephod were few and large. Each stone contained six tribal names, one on each of the two stones. They were placed separately upon the shoulders of the ephod, each set in its own golden setting. Because they were individual stones, not connected to each other, the Torah did not describe them with the term “מלואים.”

The stones of the breastplate, however, were twelve in number and arranged close together in a small space. The breastplate itself was small—one span by one span—and it contained four rows of stones. The entire breastplate was therefore filled with stones. Because the stones filled the entire space of the breastplate, the Torah described them with the term “מלואים,” meaning that they filled the breastplate.

This interpretation is supported by the language of the verse:

ומלאת בו מלואת אבן ארבעה טורים אבן

The breastplate was to be filled with stones. At the end of the description, the Torah states:

משובצים זהב יהיו במלואותם

This means that the filling of the breastplate by the stones would be complete, with each stone set in its golden socket, one next to the other, without gaps or empty spaces.

From this explanation, it follows that if the shamir was used to engrave the tribal names, it was required not only for the breastplate stones but also for the stones of the ephod. No iron tool was raised against either. Thus, Chazal were precise when they said that Moshe brought the shamir for the stones of the ephod as well. Ramban’s suggestion that the term ephod was used there to refer to the breastplate is unnecessary.

Abarbanel then notes a broader structural observation.

In the list of donations, fifteen types of materials were mentioned. These correspond to fundamental categories of creation.

• Four were from the realm of metals and inanimate matter:
  
  • זהב
  • כסף
  • נחשת
  • אבנים יקרות
• Four were from the plant kingdom:
  
  • שש (linen)
  • עצי שטים
  • שמן
  • בשמים
• Four were from the animal kingdom:
  
  • תולעת שני (silk produced from worms)
  • עזים (goat hair)
  • עורות אלים מאדמים
  • עורות תחשים
• Four were from the realm of colors:
  
  • תכלת
  • ארגמן
  • שני
  • מאדמים

Some explained that the fifteen types correspond to the fifteen foundational components of the universe:

• The prime matter
• The corporeal form
• The four elements in their forms
• The nine celestial spheres

These groupings also parallel other fourfold structures:

• The four holy creatures of the Divine chariot
• The four quarters of the heavens
• The four seasons
• The four elements
• The four primary qualities and humors

Thus, the materials of the Mishkan were not random. They represented a structured reflection of the cosmos itself, hinting at the deeper symbolism of the Mishkan as a microcosm of the world.

After listing these materials and their symbolic correspondences, the Torah concludes:

ועשו לי מקדש

As Abarbanel will explain in the next section, this statement reveals that the purpose of all these donations was not to accumulate wealth, but to create a sacred dwelling in which the Shechinah would reside among Israel.

Answer Part III (Symbolism, Prophecy, Shechinah)

ועשו לי מקדש ושכנתי בתוכם.

After listing the materials to be donated, the Torah states: “ועשו לי מקדש.” Abarbanel explains that the purpose of these donations was not to gather wealth or accumulate riches. Rather, from the materials given, a sacred structure was to be built—a holy place through which the Shechinah would dwell among Israel, just as the Divine glory had rested upon Har Sinai before their eyes, like a consuming fire within a cloud.

The sanctuary is called by several different names, each expressing a different aspect of its function.

• אהל מועד — because it stood in the wilderness in the form of a tent, made of curtains and boards.
• משכן ה׳ — because the Shechinah dwelled there.
• משכן העדות — because the Torah and the Luchos, the testimony between Israel and their Father in Heaven, were placed there.
• מקדש ה׳ — because no uncircumcised or impure person could enter, as the verse says, “ואת מקדשי תיראו” (ויקרא י״ט:ל׳).

The verse continues:

ככל אשר אני מראה אותך את תבנית המשכן ואת תבנית כל כליו וכן תעשו.

Abarbanel explains that this indicates that the Mishkan and all its vessels were symbolic representations of the structure of the world and its parts, as well as of the proper path that a person should follow to attain ultimate perfection. As he later explains through symbolic interpretations, the entire order of creation and the secrets of existence were reflected in the design of the Mishkan.

For when Hashem showed Moshe the secrets of existence upon the mountain—its structure, the paths of the Torah, and its hidden dimensions—He also informed him that all these realities were alluded to within the craftsmanship of the Mishkan. This is the meaning of “וכן תעשו”: just as I show you the structure of existence and its connections, so you shall construct a parallel structure in My Mishkan and in the vessels of My service.

Some commentators explained this verse differently, saying that it commands that in future generations, when the permanent Beis HaMikdash would be built, it should follow the same pattern—not in size, but in form and conceptual structure. This interpretation is also valid.

However, according to the plain meaning, Abarbanel explains in accordance with Chazal that Hashem showed Moshe an actual, sensory vision of the Mishkan and all its vessels upon the mountain. It was as though they stood before him in tangible form. This miracle was granted so that Moshe could form a perfect mental image of the construction and then instruct the craftsmen precisely how to build it. Matters of engineering and form are grasped more completely through direct sight than through verbal description alone. The human imagination cannot fully grasp the dimensions and relations of physical structures merely through words, as it can through visual perception.

This is similar to what is said elsewhere: “ויראהו ה׳ את כל הארץ” (דברים ל״ד:א׳), where Moshe was shown the land in a direct vision.

For this reason, Moshe would hear the Divine voice speaking to him from above the Kapores, from between the two Keruvim, in a perceptible manner. The prophecy of the master of prophets was unique in this regard. He heard the words in a tangible voice so that he could write the Torah exactly as he heard it from the mouth of the Almighty. This is a fundamental principle concerning prophecy and the unique level of Moshe Rabbeinu.

From all this, Abarbanel concludes that the purpose of the Mishkan and its vessels was to create the conditions through which the Divine Presence would attach itself to Israel, even in the lowly and barren environment of the wilderness. Through the sanctity and preparation of the Mishkan, the Shechinah would dwell among them.

The benefit of this indwelling was that Divine providence and protection would remain attached to Israel. They would not imagine that Hashem had abandoned the earth, nor would they resemble the other nations, who believed that the Creator was distant and unconcerned with human affairs.

Many philosophers among the nations argued that since particular events are known only through physical sensation, and since the Creator is free of all physicality, He does not know or supervise individual matters. They imagined that “השמים כסאו” meant that He is far removed from human life and existence.

To uproot these false beliefs from the hearts of Israel, Hashem commanded the construction of the Mishkan, a sacred sanctuary, as though He Himself would dwell among them. Through this, they would believe that the living G-d was in their midst, and that His providence was attached to them. This is the meaning of:

ושכנתי בתוך בני ישראל
והתהלכתי בתוככם

Such expressions are metaphorical language describing the indwelling of the Shechinah and the attachment of Divine providence, brought about through the sanctity and preparations of the Mishkan.

For this reason, the holy Kohanim were stationed there, whose constant service was their vocation. The laver and its base were placed before them, as if to proclaim: “רחצו הזכו הסירו רוע מעלליכם” (ישעיה א׳:ט״ז).

The outer altar symbolized the burning away of physical desires and the evil inclination. Inside the Heichal, the Shulchan, the Menorah, and the incense altar stood as though they were instruments of service before the King of the world—not because He required any of these things, G-d forbid, but in order to implant in their hearts the awareness that Hashem was present within their camp.

This is the poetic meaning of the verse:

הנה זה עומד אחר כתלנו
משגיח מן החלונות
מציץ מן החרכים
(שיר השירים ב׳:ט׳)

He stands behind our wall, watching through the windows, peering through the cracks—observing all their deeds and thoughts.

This was also the intention behind the verse:

השמים כסאי והארץ הדום רגלי
אי זה בית אשר תבנו לי
(ישעיה ס״ו:א׳)

Meaning: I do not need a house or dwelling, for My hands made all these things. I commanded their construction only to instill within your hearts the awareness of My providence. As the verse continues:

ואל זה אביט
אל עני ונכה רוח
(ישעיה ס״ו:ב׳)

So too, Shlomo intended this when he prayed at the dedication of the Beis HaMikdash.

In this way, Abarbanel concludes, the first question is resolved: the Mishkan was not a physical dwelling for Hashem, but a pedagogical and spiritual structure, designed to embed awareness of Divine presence and providence within the people of Israel.

25:10 — וְעָשׂ֥וּ אֲר֖וֹן עֲצֵ֣י שִׁטִּ֑ים אַמָּתַ֨יִם וָחֵ֜צִי אׇרְכּ֗וֹ וְאַמָּ֤ה וָחֵ֙צִי֙ רׇחְבּ֔וֹ וְאַמָּ֥ה וָחֵ֖צִי קֹמָתֽוֹ׃

This next pshat of Abarbanel is quite long containing 4 Sections:

• Philosophical Introduction
• First Symbolic System
• Abarbanel’s Own Symbolic System
• Return to Pshat

I will explain it in 8 Segments:

1. Segment 1 — Philosophical Introduction

• Opening question about symbolism
• Survey of opinions:
  
  • Chazal
  • Rambam
  • Ralbag
  • Philosophers
  • Transition into his own approach

2. Segment 2 — Cosmic Symbolism: Places 1–3
   
   • Donations
   • Fifteen materials
   • Aron & intellects
3. Segment 3 — Cosmic Symbolism: Places 4–5
   
   • Shulchan
   • Menorah
4. Segment 4 — Cosmic Symbolism: Places 6–7
   
   • Curtains
   • Paroches
5. Segment 5 — Cosmic Symbolism: Places 8–11
   
   • Masach
   • Outer altar
   • Courtyard
   • Ketores altar
   • closing summary of this system
6. Segment 6 — Abarbanel’s Own Symbolic System (Introduction + Structure)
   
   • “ואשר אאמינהו אני בזה…”
   • Rejection of philosophical symbolism
   • Four social classes
   • Mishkan as human society model
7. Segment 7 — Three Rewards Model
   
   • Shulchan → wealth
   • Menorah → wisdom
   • Ketores → immortality
   • Outer altar and laver symbolism
8. Segment 8 — Pshat Conclusion
   
   • “הנכון אצלי על דרך הפשט…”
   • Order of vessels by material
   • Closing transition into next verses

Segment 1 — Philosophical Introduction

“וְעָשׂוּ אֲרוֹן עֲצֵי שִׁטִּים”

Introduction to the Symbolism of the Mishkan

Abarbanel begins his discussion of the Aron by addressing a fundamental question: whether the Mishkan and its vessels were intended to represent deeper philosophical or cosmological truths. Many sages and thinkers, both among Israel and among the philosophers, attempted to interpret the structure of the Mishkan as a symbolic model of the universe. Abarbanel therefore surveys these views before presenting his own approach.

He notes that some among the Sages saw symbolic meaning in the Mishkan. For example, they taught that the phrase “ועשו לי מקדש” corresponds to the creation of the world. Just as it is written, “בראשית ברא אלקים את השמים ואת הארץ,” so too the command to build the Mishkan parallels the structure of creation. In this reading, the Mishkan is a microcosm of the world.

The Rambam followed a different path. He held that the Mishkan and its vessels were not designed as cosmic symbols. Rather, their purpose was practical and educational. The offerings, incense, and other rituals were intended to wean Israel away from idolatrous practices by redirecting their instincts toward the service of Hashem. According to him, the Mishkan’s forms were not meant to represent metaphysical structures, but to serve as a corrective system within the religious life of the people.

Ralbag, however, took yet another approach. He maintained that the Mishkan and its vessels were arranged to reflect the structure of the cosmos. According to his explanation, the sanctuary represented the world in its ordered layers, from the spiritual realm down to the physical.

Other philosophers similarly saw the Mishkan as a symbolic model of the universe. In their view, each vessel corresponded to a different level of existence, from the intellectual world to the celestial spheres and the earthly realm.

Abarbanel then critiques these approaches. He argues that many of these interpretations are forced or overly speculative. The correspondences between the vessels and the cosmic spheres are not always natural or convincing, and some explanations rely on philosophical assumptions that are not necessarily rooted in the Torah itself.

Nevertheless, he acknowledges that there is some truth in the idea that the Mishkan contains symbolic meaning. The Torah is not merely describing physical objects; it is presenting a sacred structure filled with significance.

He therefore announces that he will explain the Mishkan’s symbolism in an orderly manner. First, he will present the philosophical model that relates the Mishkan to the structure of the universe, as some earlier thinkers proposed. After that, he will present the approach that he himself believes to be correct, explaining the Mishkan according to a different symbolic framework. Finally, he will offer the straightforward explanation of the order of the vessels according to the simple meaning of the text.

With this introduction, Abarbanel prepares the reader for the sequence of symbolic correspondences that will follow in the next section, where he begins listing the “places” (המקומות) that express the Mishkan’s relationship to the structure of existence.

Segment 2 — Cosmic Symbolism: Places 1–3

After presenting the philosophical approach that views the Mishkan as a model of the universe, Abarbanel begins to outline that system in an ordered sequence. He describes a series of “places” (מקומות), each representing a symbolic correspondence between a component of the Mishkan and a level of creation.

המקום הא׳
The first correspondence lies in the command:

ויקחו לי תרומה

The donations were to be taken from the people willingly, from the generosity of their hearts. This reflects the nature of creation itself. The world was not formed out of necessity or compulsion, but through the Divine will alone. Just as the Mishkan was constructed from voluntary offerings, so too the universe was brought into existence through the רצון אלקי, the free and sovereign will of Hashem.

The act of giving, therefore, symbolizes the act of creation. The Mishkan’s formation from voluntary contributions mirrors the world’s emergence from Divine רצון.

המקום הב׳
The second correspondence lies in the fifteen categories of materials mentioned in the donations. Abarbanel had previously noted that these materials can be grouped into fundamental categories of existence—metals, plants, animals, and colors.

These fifteen materials correspond to the fifteen foundational elements through which the world is structured, as understood by the philosophers. They include:

• The prime matter
• The corporeal form
• The four elemental forms
• The nine celestial spheres

Thus, the very materials from which the Mishkan was constructed symbolically represent the structure of the universe itself. The Mishkan, built from these fifteen components, reflects the fifteen foundational constituents of existence.

המקום הג׳
The third correspondence concerns the Aron.

ועשו ארון עצי שטים

The Aron represents the highest level of existence: the world of the intellects—the separate, spiritual beings that exist beyond the celestial spheres. These are the pure intelligences that are not bound by matter.

Just as the Aron stood in the innermost sanctum, in the Kodesh HaKodashim, so too the world of the intellects occupies the highest and most elevated realm of existence.

The Aron’s special construction reflects this status:

• It was made of wood but overlaid with gold, inside and outside.
• It contained the Luchos, the Divine testimony.
• It was placed in the most sacred and concealed chamber.

All of this reflects the purity, perfection, and elevation of the intellectual realm, which stands above the physical cosmos and directs it. The Aron, therefore, symbolizes the highest order of existence—the עולם השכלים הנבדלים, the world of the separate intellects.

With these first three correspondences, Abarbanel establishes the basic structure of the cosmic interpretation: the Mishkan’s materials reflect the structure of creation, and its innermost vessel represents the highest level of spiritual reality.

Segment 3 — Cosmic Symbolism: Places 4–5

Abarbanel continues outlining the philosophical system that interprets the Mishkan as a symbolic model of the universe. After associating the Aron with the highest realm of separate intellects, he turns to the vessels of the Heichal.

המקום הד׳
The fourth correspondence concerns the Shulchan.

ועשית שלחן עצי שטים…

The Shulchan represents the sphere of the zodiac—the great celestial sphere that contains the twelve constellations. This correspondence is reflected in the structure of the Shulchan itself.

Upon the table were placed twelve loaves of the Lechem HaPanim, arranged in a fixed order. These twelve loaves correspond to the twelve mazalos of the zodiac. Just as the constellations govern the cycles of time and the distribution of influences in the physical world, the twelve loaves symbolically represent the ordered structure of the heavens.

The Shulchan, therefore, stands for the sphere that encompasses the twelve constellations, the great wheel of the heavens through which the celestial influences are transmitted.

המקום הה׳
The fifth correspondence concerns the Menorah.

ועשית מנרת זהב טהור…

The Menorah corresponds to the seven planets. The planetary bodies were understood by the philosophers to move beneath the sphere of the zodiac, each in its own orbit. The seven branches of the Menorah therefore represent these seven planetary spheres.

The structure of the Menorah itself supports this symbolism:

• It had seven branches.
• Each branch held a lamp.
• The lamps shone with light, just as the planets were understood to reflect and distribute celestial light.

The Menorah, standing in the Heichal, thus symbolizes the planetary realm—the ordered movement of the seven heavenly bodies that influence the lower world.

Through the Shulchan and the Menorah, Abarbanel’s philosophical model presents the Heichal as corresponding to the celestial spheres: the Shulchan representing the zodiac, and the Menorah representing the seven planets that move beneath it. These vessels therefore express the structure and order of the heavens within the symbolic architecture of the Mishkan.

Segment 4 — Cosmic Symbolism: Places 6–7

Abarbanel continues the philosophical interpretation that views the Mishkan as a symbolic representation of the structure of the universe. After associating the Aron with the world of the separate intellects, the Shulchan with the zodiac, and the Menorah with the seven planets, he now turns to the structural elements of the Mishkan itself.

המקום הו׳
The sixth correspondence concerns the curtains of the Mishkan.

ועשית יריעות למשכן…

The curtains of the Mishkan represent the ten celestial spheres. According to the philosophical model, the heavens were composed of multiple concentric spheres, each enclosing the one beneath it. These spheres together formed the structure of the cosmos.

The Mishkan’s coverings, layered one upon another, reflect this arrangement. Just as the celestial spheres surround the lower realms, the curtains enveloped the inner structure of the Mishkan.

The number and layering of the curtains symbolize the ordered structure of the heavens, with each layer corresponding to one of the celestial spheres that encompass the world.

המקום הז׳
The seventh correspondence concerns the Paroches.

ועשית פרכת…

The Paroches, which separated the Kodesh HaKodashim from the Heichal, represents the division between two levels of existence:

• The realm of the separate intellects
• The realm of the celestial spheres

The world of the intellects stands above the spheres and is entirely spiritual and immaterial. The spheres themselves, though elevated, still belong to the physical structure of the cosmos. The Paroches symbolizes the boundary between these two domains.

Just as the Paroches separated the innermost sanctum—where the Aron stood—from the outer chamber, so too there is a separation between the highest spiritual realm and the celestial spheres that govern the physical universe.

Through the symbolism of the curtains and the Paroches, the Mishkan reflects not only the existence of the celestial spheres but also the distinctions between the levels of existence within the cosmic order.

Segment 5 — Cosmic Symbolism: Places 8–11

Abarbanel continues the philosophical model that interprets the Mishkan as a representation of the structure of the universe. Having described the symbolism of the curtains and the Paroches, he now turns to the remaining elements of the Mishkan and its courtyard.

המקום הח׳
The eighth correspondence concerns the Masach at the entrance of the Mishkan.

ועשית מסך לפתח האהל…

The Masach represents the division between the celestial world and the earthly realm. The heavens, with their spheres and ordered motions, differ fundamentally from the world beneath the moon, which is subject to change, generation, and corruption.

Just as the Masach stood at the entrance of the Mishkan, marking the boundary between the sacred interior and the outer courtyard, so too there is a boundary between the higher celestial domain and the lower world of earthly existence.

המקום הט׳
The ninth correspondence concerns the Mizbeach HaOlah.

ועשית את המזבח…

The outer altar represents the lower world—the sublunar realm in which physical beings exist. This world is characterized by generation, decay, and mortality.

Upon the outer altar, animals were slaughtered and burned. This process symbolizes the nature of the physical world, where all living things are subject to destruction and transformation. The altar thus reflects the realm of material existence, governed by the cycle of life and death.

המקום הי׳
The tenth correspondence concerns the courtyard of the Mishkan.

ועשית את חצר המשכן…

The courtyard represents the domain of human life. It is the place where the people gathered and where the primary sacrificial service took place. This corresponds to the human condition, situated within the lower world and engaged in actions that lead either toward elevation or decline.

The courtyard, therefore, symbolizes the sphere of human existence, the realm in which people act, choose, and bring offerings that reflect their spiritual state.

המקום הי״א
The eleventh correspondence concerns the Mizbeach HaKetores.

ועשית מזבח מקטר קטרת…

The incense altar, placed within the Heichal, represents the ninth celestial sphere. This sphere was understood by the philosophers to be the outermost sphere that encloses all the others and governs their motion.

The incense, rising upward in fragrant smoke, symbolizes the subtle, elevated nature of this sphere. Just as the incense ascends and spreads its influence, the outer sphere encompasses and influences all the lower spheres within it.

Through these final correspondences, the philosophical model presents the Mishkan as a complete symbolic image of the universe:

• The Aron represents the highest world of intellects.
• The Shulchan and Menorah represent the celestial spheres.
• The curtains and partitions represent the structure and divisions of the heavens.
• The altar and courtyard represent the physical and human realms.

In this way, the entire structure of the Mishkan is seen as a microcosm of the universe, expressing the ordered hierarchy of existence from the highest spiritual levels down to the world of human action.

Segment 6 — Abarbanel’s Own Symbolic System (Introduction + Structure)

After presenting the philosophical system that interprets the Mishkan as a symbolic representation of the cosmos, Abarbanel now turns to the approach he himself accepts.

ואשר אאמינהו אני בזה…

He explains that, although the earlier philosophical correspondences contain elements of truth, they are not the most fitting or faithful interpretation. The Mishkan was not constructed in order to represent the structure of the celestial spheres or the metaphysical universe. Rather, its symbolism is directed toward human life, society, and the path to spiritual perfection through the Torah.

According to Abarbanel, the Mishkan reflects the structure of human society and the ultimate purpose of the Jewish people. The Torah was given not only to guide individual conduct but to shape a complete national order, in which each group contributes to the collective good.

He describes four principal classes within society:

• The first group consists of those devoted to material labor: farmers, artisans, and all who engage in physical production. These people sustain the material needs of society.
• The second group consists of the warriors and leaders who protect the nation, administer justice, and maintain order. They safeguard the people from external threats and internal disorder.
• The third group consists of the wise and learned—those who devote themselves to knowledge, reflection, and the understanding of truth. They elevate society intellectually and morally.
• The fourth and highest group consists of those devoted to the service of Hashem—individuals whose lives are centered upon Torah, holiness, and the spiritual service of the Divine.

The purpose of the Mishkan, according to this model, is to represent the ideal structure of such a society. It demonstrates that the ultimate perfection of human life is not found in wealth, power, or even intellectual achievement alone, but in the service of Hashem and the attainment of spiritual closeness to Him.

The sanctuary therefore stands as a symbolic center of national life. Its vessels represent the different forms of human striving, and its structure shows how all levels of existence are meant to lead toward the highest goal: the knowledge of Hashem and attachment to Him.

Within this framework, Abarbanel explains that the Mishkan’s vessels correspond to the three principal forms of human reward and perfection. These will be described in the next section, where the Shulchan, Menorah, and Mizbeach HaKetores are interpreted as symbols of these three levels of human attainment.

Segment 7 — Three Rewards Model
(Abarbanel’s Own Symbolic System)

Abarbanel now explains the inner structure of his own symbolic system. The Mishkan, he teaches, represents the path of human perfection, and its vessels correspond to the three principal forms of reward or attainment available to a person in this world and the next.

Human life is directed toward three fundamental goals:

• Material success and sustenance
• Intellectual and spiritual wisdom
• The eternal existence of the soul in closeness to Hashem

These three forms of attainment are symbolized by the three primary vessels within the Heichal.

The Shulchan represents material blessing.
The table held the Lechem HaPanim, the bread that was constantly present before Hashem. Bread is the basic symbol of sustenance and physical provision. The Shulchan therefore represents the blessing of material livelihood, the abundance that allows human life to be sustained.

It teaches that physical prosperity is one of the legitimate rewards granted by Hashem, and that the material world, when used properly, becomes a means of serving Him.

The Menorah represents wisdom.
The Menorah, with its radiant light, symbolizes the light of knowledge and understanding. Just as the lamps illuminated the sanctuary, wisdom illuminates the human mind and guides a person toward truth.

The Menorah therefore represents intellectual and spiritual attainment—the wisdom that refines the soul and directs a person toward higher purposes.

The Mizbeach HaKetores represents the immortality of the soul.
The incense altar stood closest to the Kodesh HaKodashim, and its fragrant smoke rose upward. This ascent symbolizes the soul’s elevation beyond the physical world.

The incense, which was neither eaten nor used for practical purposes, represents the purely spiritual reward—the eternal life of the soul in closeness to Hashem.

Thus, the three vessels of the Heichal represent the three principal forms of human attainment:

• The Shulchan: material prosperity
• The Menorah: wisdom and enlightenment
• The Mizbeach HaKetores: eternal spiritual life

Abarbanel then explains the symbolism of the outer vessels.

The Mizbeach HaOlah represents death and the destruction of the physical body.
On this altar, animals were slaughtered and burned. This reflects the inevitable end of all physical existence. The body is subject to decay and return to dust, just as the offerings were consumed by fire.

This altar reminds a person of mortality and the transient nature of physical life.

The Kiyor represents purification.
The laver, from which the Kohanim washed before performing the service, symbolizes the purification of one’s actions and character. Just as the Kohanim were required to wash before entering the sacred service, a person must cleanse himself from sin and moral corruption before pursuing higher spiritual goals.

Together, these elements present a complete vision of human life:

• The physical body is mortal and perishable.
• A person must purify himself from wrongdoing.
• Through proper living, he may attain material blessing, wisdom, and ultimately the immortality of the soul.

In this way, the Mishkan becomes a symbolic map of the human journey—from physical existence, through purification and wisdom, toward eternal spiritual closeness to Hashem.

Segment 8 — Pshat Conclusion
(Order of the Vessels)

After presenting the philosophical interpretation and then his own symbolic explanation, Abarbanel concludes with what he considers the straightforward, plain meaning of the text.

הנכון אצלי על דרך הפשט…

According to the simple meaning of the verses, the order in which the vessels are commanded follows a practical and material logic, not merely a symbolic or philosophical one.

The Torah describes the vessels in the order of their materials and their relative importance.

• First is the Aron, which was made primarily of gold, both inside and outside.
• After it comes the Shulchan, which was also overlaid with gold.
• Then comes the Menorah, which was made entirely of pure gold.

These three vessels were the most precious and honored, constructed from the most valuable material.

After these, the Torah turns to the structure of the Mishkan itself—the curtains, boards, and coverings—which were made from less precious materials such as fabrics, woods, and skins.

Then it proceeds outward to the courtyard and its vessels, which were made of copper, a less valuable metal:

• The Mizbeach HaOlah
• The courtyard structures and fittings

Thus, the order of the commands follows a descending scale of materials:

• Gold
• Mixed materials (fabrics, wood, coverings)
• Copper

This progression reflects a movement from the most sacred and precious elements at the center to the less precious materials at the outer levels.

According to this explanation, the Torah’s sequence is neither arbitrary nor symbolic in a purely philosophical sense. Rather, it follows a practical logic based on the nature and value of the materials used in each vessel and part of the Mishkan.

In this way, Abarbanel concludes his discussion of the command:

ועשו ארון עצי שטים

having presented:

• The philosophical cosmological interpretation
• His own ethical-symbolic interpretation
• And finally, the plain meaning of the order of the vessels within the text.

25:23 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ שֻׁלְחָן עֲצֵי שִׁטִּים”

ועשית שלחן וגו׳ עד ועשית מנורה.

Abarbanel explains that the Mishkan was constructed in the likeness of the palace of a great king. Its internal arrangement reflects the structure of a royal residence.

The innermost chamber—the Kodesh HaKodashim—corresponds to the king’s private inner room, where his most precious possessions are kept. In such a chamber, the king stores his treasure chest and the repository of his valuables, and no one is permitted to enter. The keys to this room are not entrusted even to a servant. This parallels the place of the Aron, which stood alone in the most sacred inner sanctum.

Outside that inner chamber was the Heichal, corresponding to the royal hall where the king sits. In that space were placed the king’s table, his throne, and his lamp. There, his servants and attendants would enter to serve him.

Thus:

• The Shulchan corresponds to the king’s table, representing wealth and elevated status.
• The Menorah stands opposite it.
• The Mizbeach HaKetores occupies the place corresponding to the king’s throne.

For this reason, incense was burned there morning and evening, just as incense would be burned for kings at the time of their meals, twice each day—morning and evening.

The Shulchan itself was made of acacia wood so that it would be light and easy to carry.

Its dimensions also reflect practical reasoning:

• Its length was two cubits, sufficient for one person to eat from it.
• The average width of a person is about one cubit.
• This left half a cubit at each end for the two arrangements of bread, one on each side.
• The remaining space in the middle allowed room for eating.

Each of the two arrangements contained six loaves, corresponding to the six days of the week during which the manna descended for Israel. Each day required bread in the morning and bread in the evening.

Thus:

• Twelve loaves represented the bread of the six days.
• On Shabbos, when no manna fell, the loaves were arranged before Hashem.

The width of the table was one cubit, so that the open space before the eater measured one cubit by one cubit.

The height of the table was one and a half cubits. This corresponds to the height of a person’s body:

• The full height of a person is about three cubits.
• From the feet to the navel is one and a half cubits.

Thus, the table reached to about the navel of a standing person. From this we see that Hashem did not choose for His table to be low and placed upon the ground, as is the custom of desert peoples. Rather, the table was elevated above the ground, as is the custom in refined lands, where people eat at raised tables—especially nobles and kings. This is the more honorable and dignified manner.

The Torah states:

וצפית אותו זהב טהור

This means that the table was entirely overlaid with refined, pure gold—inside and out—with no mixture of inferior metals.

The Torah continues:

ועשית לו מסגרת וגו׳

This indicates that along the outer edge of the table’s top, a golden crown was made around it. Inside that crown, a frame of acacia wood was made, one handbreadth wide on each side. Around this frame, another crown was placed.

Both crowns were also overlaid with gold.

The outer crown served to secure the frame so that it would remain fixed in place and not shift or fall.

The inner frame and crown were designed so that the Lechem HaPanim would not slide from its arrangement or fall to either side.

For transporting the table, the Torah commands:

ועשית לו ארבע טבעות זהב

Four gold rings were to be placed at the four corners near its legs. The legs were at the base of the table, and the rings were attached at the junction of the legs and the table.

So that one would not mistakenly place the rings on the upper frame, the verse clarifies:

לעומת המסגרת תהיינה הטבעות

The rings were to be placed opposite the frame, meaning below it, at the corners where the legs met the table. These rings served as housings for the poles, through which the table would be carried.

As a result, when the table was transported during the journeys, it was carried aloft on the shoulders of those bearing it.

The Torah then commands the making of the utensils for the table:

ועשית קערותיו וכפותיו וקשותיו ומנקיותיו…

The “קערותיו” were the molds used for baking the Lechem HaPanim. These were shaped with three walls, like the Hebrew letter ח.

The bread itself was formed like an open box, with two sides folded upward like walls. For this reason it was called Lechem HaPanim.

The loaves were first baked in iron molds. When removed from the oven on Friday, they were placed into golden molds until the next day, when they were arranged on the table. These golden molds were the “קערות.”

The “כפותיו” were the ladles used in the service of the bread. Rashi explains that they were the bowls in which the frankincense was placed.

The “קשותיו” were hollow half-tubes, split lengthwise, made of gold. They were placed between the loaves so that air could circulate between them and prevent them from becoming moldy.

The “מנקיותיו אשר יסך בהן,” according to Rashi, were like upright golden supports placed on the ground, rising above the table to the height of the bread arrangement. These supports had six branches, one above the other. The ends of the rods placed between the loaves rested upon these branches, so that the weight of the upper loaves would not press down upon the lower ones and cause them to break.

The Torah concludes:

זהב טהור תעשה אותם

This teaches that although these were service vessels, one should not treat them lightly by making them from less refined gold for greater durability. Rather, all of them were to be made from pure gold.

The ultimate purpose of the table was:

ונתת על השלחן לחם פנים לפני תמיד

The bread is called Lechem HaPanim either because it had faces on both sides of the house, or, as Ibn Ezra explains, because it stood constantly “before” Hashem.

This bread was not eaten in the sanctuary itself. Instead, it was divided among the priestly watches. This proves that it was not for the Divine need, but rather served as a symbolic reminder of the deeds of Hashem.

In the symbolic explanation, the table represents the sphere of the zodiac, as previously explained. Alternatively, it serves as a reminder that material blessings—wealth and honor—come from Hashem to those who love Him and keep His commandments.

In this way, Abarbanel resolves the third question he posed earlier.

25:30 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ מְנֹרַת זָהָב טָהוֹר”

ועשית מנורת זהב טהור וגו׳ עד ואת המשכן תעשה.

After already explaining the construction of the Shulchan, which stood to the right of one entering the Heichal, Abarbanel now turns to the Menorah, which stood to the left.

The Torah commands that the Menorah be made “מקשה”—hammered from a single piece. According to Rashi, this means that it was to be formed as a single solid body. It was not to be made in separate sections, with branches and lamps constructed independently and then joined together as craftsmen typically do. Rather, the entire structure—the central shaft, branches, knobs, flowers, and cups—was to be fashioned from a single piece of gold, hammered and shaped with tools until the various components were formed.

Thus, the verse states:

מקשה תעשה המנורה
ירכה וקנה…

The “ירך” is its base below, shaped like a box upon which the Menorah rested. The “קנה” is the central shaft rising upward from the base, standing upright, with the central lamp at its top.

The “גביעים” were cup-shaped protrusions extending from each branch, in the number specified by the verse.
The “כפתורים” were round, apple-like knobs protruding around the shaft.
The “פרחים” were decorative floral designs formed upon it.

All of these were to be made from the same single piece of gold.

Ibn Ezra, however, wrote that the Menorah was hollow. He interprets the terms “ירכה,” “קנה,” and the six branches as indicating hollow tubes, for otherwise they could not properly be called branches.

Abarbanel rejects this argument. He explains that the branches could be formed solid on the inside while still appearing externally as branches. There are many examples of rods or reeds that are solid and yet shaped like hollow tubes. Moreover, if the Menorah were hollow, it would be impossible to form it from a single piece, as the Torah requires. The command “מקשה תעשה המנורה” implies that it must be made from one solid mass of gold.

The verse says:

תעשה המנורה

Abarbanel explains that this wording was used because the construction of the Menorah was difficult in Moshe’s eyes. Hashem therefore informed him that it could indeed be made in this hammered form by skilled craftsmen. The Midrash explains that it was formed miraculously, but Abarbanel emphasizes that he is explaining the verse according to its simple meaning.

The Torah continues:

וששה קנים יוצאים מצדיה

This indicates that the central shaft stood in the middle, with three branches extending from one side and three from the other. All of them emerged from the same central structure, since the entire Menorah was made from a single piece.

The verse states:

שלשה גביעים משוקדים…

This teaches that the six side branches each contained three cups. But the central shaft contained four cups, not three. The additional cup was located in the base, while the other three were above, near the knobs, flowers, and lamp, similar to the arrangement in the branches.

The central shaft also contained three knobs. From each of these knobs emerged two branches—one to each side. This is what the verse means:

וכפתור תחת שני הקנים

This phrase is repeated three times to indicate the three knobs from which the six branches emerged.

Although the craftsmanship was complex and elaborate, the Torah insists that:

כפתוריהם וקנותם ממנה יהיו

All the knobs and branches had to be part of the same single piece, for the entire Menorah was to be hammered from one mass of gold.

The Torah again states:

זהב טהור

This teaches that even though the branches, knobs, and flowers were solid, one might have thought that since their interiors were not visible, they could be made from mixed or inferior gold. The Torah therefore emphasizes that everything must be pure gold. As the verse says, “האדם יראה לעינים וה׳ יראה ללבב” (שמואל א ט״ז:ז׳). What is hidden from human sight is known to Hashem, and therefore even the unseen portions must be pure.

After commanding the structure of the Menorah, the Torah commands its lamps:

ועשית את נרותיה שבעה
והעלה את נרותיה והאיר אל עבר פניה

The Menorah was to have seven lamps: one on the central shaft and six on the side branches. The six outer lamps were to be angled toward the central shaft, so that when they were lit, their light would shine toward the middle.

Abarbanel explains that each of the six lamps was directed toward the face of the Menorah—the central shaft. The central lamp itself faced west, toward the Aron. This was known as the western lamp (נר מערבי), from which the lighting began and at which it concluded during the daily tending of the lamps.

Thus, the seven lamps consisted of:

• Six lamps on the six branches
• One central lamp on the main shaft

According to the simple explanation, the cups, knobs, and flowers were decorative elements, added for beauty.

However, in the symbolic explanation, the seven branches represent the spheres of the seven planets. The cups, knobs, and flowers correspond to aspects of those celestial spheres and their motions.

In the Torah-symbolic interpretation, the Menorah represents intellectual wisdom. Its seven branches and seven lamps symbolize the seven branches of knowledge, while the other decorative elements represent the branching and interconnection of the sciences. The fact that the Menorah was formed from a single piece symbolizes the unity of all wisdom, just as the subjects of knowledge ultimately unite within the single reality of existence.

According to all these interpretations, Abarbanel states, the fourth question he posed earlier is resolved.

The Torah continues:

ומלקחים ומחתותיה זהב טהור

The tongs used to handle the wicks and the scoops used to remove the ash from the lamps were also to be made of pure gold. Although these were service vessels, they were still to be made from refined gold.

The Torah states that the weight of the Menorah with all its vessels was one talent of pure gold. This does not mean that the tongs and scoops were part of the same hammered piece as the Menorah. Rather, the Menorah itself was to be made from one talent of gold, as taught by Rabbi Yehudah, while the other vessels were also made of pure gold but not included in that weight. Ramban also explains the verse in this way.

Abarbanel then adds that the incense altar was not intended to remove the odor of the slaughtered sacrifices, as some claimed. The fire already consumed and removed any such smell. Instead, the incense altar symbolized the ninth celestial sphere, which contains no stars, or, in the Torah-symbolic interpretation, the immortality of the soul after death, as he explained earlier.

In this way, the fifth question is also resolved. As for why the incense altar is not mentioned here immediately after the Shulchan and Menorah, Abarbanel states that this will be explained at the end of the parsha, in the answer to the ninth question.

Chapter 25 Summary

Chapter 25 focuses on the central vessels of the Mishkan: the Aron, the Shulchan, and the Menorah. Abarbanel begins by examining the purpose of the Mishkan itself and the meaning of the command to take contributions from the people. He explains that the Mishkan was not meant to contain Hashem physically, but to serve as a place where the Shechinah would rest and where the Divine voice would continue to speak to Moshe, just as it had at Har Sinai.

He then turns to the vessels of the sanctuary, first presenting various symbolic and philosophical interpretations. Some view the Mishkan as a microcosm of the universe, with each vessel representing different cosmic or intellectual realities. Abarbanel surveys these views, then offers his own approach, in which the Mishkan represents the structure of human society and the stages of human life.

In his system, the Aron represents the Torah and the ultimate purpose of existence. The Shulchan represents material success, and the Menorah represents wisdom and intellectual illumination. These are the three rewards that a person may attain through a life directed toward Torah. Finally, Abarbanel returns to the plain meaning of the text, explaining the order of the vessels according to their materials and relative importance.

Chapter 26

26:1 — וְאֶת־הַמִּשְׁכָּ֥ן תַּעֲשֶׂ֖ה עֶ֣שֶׂר יְרִיעֹ֑ת שֵׁ֣שׁ מׇשְׁזָ֗ר וּתְכֵ֤לֶת וְאַרְגָּמָן֙ וְתֹלַ֣עַת שָׁנִ֔י כְּרֻבִ֛ים מַעֲשֵׂ֥ה חֹשֵׁ֖ב תַּעֲשֶׂ֥ה אֹתָֽם׃

I will explain Abarbanel’s pshat in 3 parts:

Part 1 — Opening Logic + Inner Curtains

• Why “ואת המשכן תעשה”
• Relationship to earlier commands
• Description of the linen curtains
• Colors, weaving, cherubim
• Dimensions and placement

Part 2 — Goat Curtains + Outer Coverings

• Goat-hair curtains
• Their dimensions and purpose
• Extra panel logic
• Western overhang
• Outer coverings:
  
  • Ram skins
  • Tachash skins
• Three-layer structure of the Mishkan

Part 3 — Boards, Sockets, and Bars

• Purpose of the boards
• Their shape and thickness
• Transportation logic
• Description of the sockets
• Corner boards
• Bars and rings
• Gold overlay
• Final instruction:
  
  • “והקמות את המשכן כמשפטו…”

Part 1 — Opening Logic and the Inner Curtains

ואת המשכן תעשה עשר יריעות וגו׳.

Abarbanel begins by explaining why the Torah now turns from the vessels to the structure of the Mishkan itself. Earlier, the Torah described the Aron, Shulchan, and Menorah—objects made primarily of gold and associated with the innermost sanctity. Now it proceeds to describe the Mishkan’s construction.

The verse states:

ואת המשכן תעשה…

This indicates that after commanding the vessels, which were of the highest value and sanctity, the Torah now turns to the structure that would house them. The order follows the progression from the most precious objects inward to the structure that surrounds them.

The Mishkan itself consisted primarily of curtains, boards, and coverings. The first to be described are the inner curtains.

עשר יריעות…

Ten curtains were to be made from fine materials:

• שש משזר (fine twisted linen)
• תכלת
• ארגמן
• תולעת שני

These were to be woven together in a skillful design, with figures of keruvim woven into them.

מעשה חושב כרובים…

The phrase indicates a highly skilled weaving, in which the designs were integrated into the fabric itself, not embroidered afterward. The keruvim were not separate pieces sewn on, but part of the woven structure of the curtains.

The dimensions of each curtain were:

• Twenty-eight cubits in length
• Four cubits in width

All ten curtains were of equal size.

These ten curtains were then joined into two sets:

• Five curtains joined together
• Another five curtains joined together

Each set formed a large panel. Along the edges of these panels, loops were made so that the two sections could be joined.

The Torah commands:

ועשית לולאות תכלת…

Fifty loops of blue wool were to be made on the edge of each set of curtains. Opposite each loop on the other set, a corresponding loop was placed.

Then:

ועשית קרסי זהב…

Fifty golden clasps were made to join the loops. These clasps connected the two sets of five curtains into a single unified covering.

The Torah concludes:

והיה המשכן אחד

Through these clasps, the ten curtains became one continuous structure.

Abarbanel explains that this inner curtain served as the primary ceiling and interior covering of the Mishkan. It was the most beautiful and refined of the coverings, woven from fine linen and colored threads, with the figures of keruvim.

This inner layer was the one visible from inside the Mishkan, forming the ceiling above the sacred vessels. For this reason, it was made with the greatest beauty and artistry.

The purpose of the loops and clasps was not only to join the curtains, but also to allow them to be easily assembled and disassembled during the journeys. Since the Mishkan was a portable structure, every component had to be designed for transport.

Thus, the inner curtains formed a single, unified, and beautifully crafted covering, suspended over the boards of the Mishkan and serving as the primary inner roof of the sanctuary.

Part 2 — Goat-Hair Curtains and Outer Coverings

ועשית יריעות עזים לאהל על המשכן…

After describing the inner curtains of fine linen, Abarbanel explains that the Torah now turns to the second layer—the curtains made from goat hair. These formed an outer tent above the inner linen covering.

These curtains were made of:

עזים — goat hair

This material was coarser and stronger than the linen of the inner curtains. Its purpose was not beauty, but protection and durability. The goat-hair curtains formed a tent-like structure above the Mishkan, shielding the inner curtains from the elements.

Unlike the inner curtains, which were ten in number, these were eleven curtains. Each curtain measured:

• Thirty cubits in length
• Four cubits in width

Thus, they were longer than the inner curtains by two cubits. Abarbanel explains that this extra length was intentional. The additional length allowed the goat-hair curtains to hang down over the sides of the Mishkan, covering and protecting the inner curtains beneath them.

These eleven curtains were arranged in two groups:

• One group of five curtains
• Another group of six curtains

The Torah commands:

וכפלת את היריעה הששית אל מול פני האהל

The sixth curtain of the second group was to be folded over at the front of the tent. This created an additional protective layer at the entrance, the most exposed part of the structure.

Like the inner curtains, the goat-hair curtains were joined together using loops and clasps. However, in this case, the clasps were made of copper, not gold.

Abarbanel explains that this difference reflects the hierarchy of materials:

• The inner curtains, which were visible inside the sanctuary and closer to the vessels of gold, were joined with golden clasps.
• The outer curtains, being of lesser sanctity and placed on the exterior, were joined with copper clasps.

The Torah then explains the function of the extra length:

וסרח העודף ביריעות האהל…

The additional portion of the goat-hair curtains hung down over the back of the Mishkan. This ensured that the inner linen curtains were fully covered and protected.

The Torah further commands:

והאמה מזה והאמה מזה…

One cubit on each side of the extra curtain was to hang down over the sides of the Mishkan. This completed the protective covering around the structure.

After describing the goat-hair curtains, the Torah commands the outermost coverings:

ועשית מכסה לאהל עורות אלים מאדמים ומכסה עורות תחשים מלמעלה

Two additional coverings were placed above the goat-hair curtains:

• A covering made from the skins of rams dyed red
• A covering made from the skins of tachash

These formed the outermost layers of the Mishkan.

Abarbanel explains that these coverings were designed for protection against rain, sun, and wind. They served as a durable exterior shell over the tent-like structure of the Mishkan.

Thus, the Mishkan had three principal layers of covering:

1. The inner linen curtains, richly woven and visible from inside
2. The goat-hair curtains, forming the tent structure
3. The outer coverings of ram and tachash skins, protecting the entire structure from the elements

In this way, the sanctuary was both beautiful within and protected from without, combining aesthetic refinement with practical durability.

Part 3 — Boards, Sockets, and Bars

ועשית את הקרשים למשכן עצי שטים עומדים…

After describing the coverings of the Mishkan, the Torah turns to the structural frame—the boards that formed the walls of the sanctuary.

Abarbanel explains that although the Mishkan was a tent-like structure, it was not supported by ropes and stakes like an ordinary desert tent. Instead, it was constructed as a stable, upright building, with vertical boards forming its walls. This gave the Mishkan the dignity and permanence of a proper dwelling.

The boards were made of:

עצי שטים — acacia wood

This wood was chosen because it was strong, durable, and relatively light, making it suitable for a structure that needed to be assembled, disassembled, and transported.

The Torah states:

עשר אמות אורך הקרש
ואמה וחצי האמה רחב הקרש

Each board was:

• Ten cubits tall
• One and a half cubits wide

These boards stood upright to form the walls of the Mishkan.

The Torah then commands:

שתי ידות לקרש האחד…

Each board had two projecting tenons at its base. These tenons fit into sockets placed on the ground, securing the boards in an upright position.

The sockets were made of silver. Two sockets were placed beneath each board, one for each tenon. In this way, the boards stood firmly in place.

The arrangement of the boards was as follows:

• Twenty boards on the south side
• Twenty boards on the north side
• Eight boards on the western side

This formed three enclosed sides of the Mishkan, with the entrance on the east.

The Torah then describes the corner boards:

ושני קרשים תעשה לפנות המשכן בירכתים

Two special boards were made for the rear corners. These were joined together at the corners to strengthen the structure and ensure stability. They were constructed in a way that allowed them to connect securely with the boards of both adjoining sides.

All the boards were:

וצפית אותם זהב

They were overlaid with gold. This gave the interior walls a dignified and radiant appearance, suitable for a sanctuary.

The Torah then commands the making of the bars:

ועשית בריחים…

These were horizontal bars made of acacia wood and overlaid with gold. They passed through rings attached to the boards, holding them together and strengthening the entire structure.

There were:

• Five bars on the south side
• Five bars on the north side
• Five bars on the west side

The central bar was special. It ran through the middle of the boards from one end of the structure to the other, passing through the entire length of the wall. This central bar unified the boards into a single continuous structure.

The rings that held the bars were also made of gold.

Through this system of boards, sockets, rings, and bars, the Mishkan achieved both:

• Structural stability
• Portability for travel

The Torah then concludes this section with a final instruction:

והקמות את המשכן כמשפטו אשר הראית בהר

Moshe was commanded to erect the Mishkan according to the precise form that had been shown to him on the mountain. This emphasizes that the structure was not a human invention, but followed a Divine pattern revealed to Moshe.

Thus, the Mishkan’s frame—its boards, sockets, and bars—formed a stable and dignified structure, capable of being assembled and disassembled as the people journeyed through the wilderness, yet built according to the exact pattern shown by Hashem.

26:31 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ פָרֹכֶת”

ועשית פרכת וגו׳ עד ועשית את המזבח עצי שטים.

After describing the structure of the Mishkan and its coverings, the Torah now turns to the Paroches and the Masach. Abarbanel explains that once the materials of the Mishkan—gold, silver, copper, techeiles, argaman, tolaas shani, fine linen, and acacia wood—had been described, the Torah proceeded to describe the Paroches, which was made in the same manner as the inner curtains of the Mishkan. After it, the Torah describes the Masach at the entrance of the tent.

The Paroches separated between the Kodesh and the Kodesh HaKodashim, while the Masach separated between the courtyard and the Heichal. The materials of the Masach were techeiles, argaman, tolaas shani, and fine linen, with pillars of acacia wood set in copper sockets.

The Paroches was similar to the inner curtains of the Mishkan both in its materials and its craftsmanship. It too was made of fine linen, techeiles, argaman, and tolaas shani, and it was woven in the form of “מעשה חושב כרובים”—a skilled weaving that included the figures of keruvim.

The only difference between the Paroches and the curtains of the Mishkan was in their dimensions and placement. The Paroches was a single square curtain, ten cubits by ten cubits. It was suspended from four acacia-wood pillars, which were overlaid with gold in honor of the sacred space they served.

It is not known whether the pillars stood in front of the Paroches or behind it, but their hooks were made of gold, meaning at the tops of the pillars, from which the Paroches was hung.

The pillars stood upon four silver sockets. The sockets were made of silver because silver is stronger than gold, and their pointed bases were driven into the ground like stakes. The lower ends of the pillars were shaped to fit into these sockets securely.

Copper sockets were not used here, because this location was near the Kodesh HaKodashim, and the honor of that sacred place required the use of silver.

The Torah states:

ונתת את הפרכת תחת הקרסים

This means that the Paroches was to be hung beneath the clasps that joined the inner curtains. It was placed at the point where the clasps were located, which was at one-third of the length of the Mishkan from the west. From that point to the eastern entrance remained twenty cubits—the width of the five connected curtains.

The verse continues:

והבאת שמה מבית לפרכת…

This indicates that the Aron of the Testimony was to be brought into the inner chamber, beyond the Paroches, near the western wall. The Aron contained the Luchos, the testimony between Hashem and Israel, and above it stood the Kapores with the Keruvim.

The Torah then explains the purpose of the Paroches:

והבדילה הפרכת לכם בין הקדש ובין קדש הקדשים

The Paroches served to separate the two chambers, so that one standing in the Heichal would not see the Kapores and the Keruvim within the Kodesh HaKodashim.

Abarbanel notes that the phrase “לכם” indicates that this separation was for all Israel and the Kohanim, not for Moshe. Moshe could enter there at any time and speak with Hashem face to face.

The Torah then instructs what was to be placed outside the Paroches:

• The Shulchan on the northern side
• The Menorah on the southern side

The phrase “על צלע המשכן” means along the sides of the Mishkan. The length of the Shulchan ran along the northern wall, and the length of the Menorah ran along the southern wall.

The incense altar stood in front of the Paroches, directly opposite it. The incense rising from it formed a cloud that symbolically separated the viewer from what was beyond.

After commanding the Paroches, which separated between the Kodesh and the Kodesh HaKodashim, the Torah commands the Masach at the entrance of the tent. This stood on the eastern side, separating the Heichal from the courtyard.

The Heichal was called an “Ohel” because it was formed from curtains supported by pillars. The Masach served the purpose of modesty and concealment. Those standing in the courtyard—even the Kohanim performing the sacrificial service—should not look into the Heichal and see the Shulchan, the Menorah, the incense altar, or the Paroches within.

There were three differences between the inner Paroches and the outer Masach:

1. The Paroches was woven in the form of “מעשה חושב כרובים,” with figures of keruvim. The Masach, however, was only “מעשה רוקם,” a simpler embroidered work, without keruvim.
2. The Paroches was hung on four pillars, while the Masach was hung on five pillars.
3. The sockets of the Paroches were made of silver, while the sockets of the Masach were made of copper.

Abarbanel explains these differences according to the plain meaning.

Because the Paroches separated the Kodesh from the Kodesh HaKodashim, the place of the Aron and the Keruvim, it was fitting that keruvim be woven into it. Thus, it was made as “מעשה חושב,” so that the images of the keruvim would be visible on both sides, indicating that the actual keruvim stood behind it.

The Masach, however, was not near the keruvim, and therefore no such images were required. It was not made as “מעשה חושב,” since there were no keruvim depicted in it.

The Masach was also larger than the Paroches, because it needed to cover the entire entrance of the tent for the sake of modesty. Therefore, it required five pillars, while the Paroches, being smaller, required only four.

The sockets of the Paroches were made of silver because of the honor of the sacred space between the Kodesh and the Kodesh HaKodashim. The Masach, however, stood between the Heichal and the outer altar. Its pillars were overlaid with gold, and their hooks were of gold, indicating that from the side of the Heichal they alluded to the eternity of the heavens. But their sockets were of copper, indicating that from the side of the altar, everything was subject to decay and destruction.

In this way, Abarbanel resolves the sixth question he had posed earlier.

Chapter 26 Summary

Chapter 26 describes the structure of the Mishkan itself: its curtains, coverings, boards, sockets, and bars, as well as the Paroches and the entrance screen. Abarbanel explains the architectural logic of these elements and their relationship to one another.

The inner curtains, richly woven with keruvim, formed the beautiful inner ceiling of the sanctuary. Above them were the goat-hair curtains, which served as a protective tent, and above those were the outer coverings of ram and tachash skins. These layers combined beauty and function, creating a structure that was both dignified and portable.

He then describes the boards that formed the walls of the Mishkan, their silver sockets, and the bars that held them together. The Mishkan was thus not an ordinary tent, but a stable, upright structure, giving it the appearance of a proper dwelling for the Divine Presence.

Finally, Abarbanel explains the Paroches and the Masach. The Paroches separated the Kodesh from the Kodesh HaKodashim, while the Masach separated the Heichal from the courtyard. The differences in their materials, pillars, and construction reflect the differing levels of sanctity within the Mishkan.

Chapter 27

27:1 — “וְעָשִׂיתָ אֶת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ עֲצֵי שִׁטִּים”

ועשית את המזבח עצי שטים וגו׳ עד ועשית את חצר המשכן.

After describing the items made of gold and silver, and those made from techeiles, argaman, tolaas shani, fine linen, and acacia wood, the Torah now turns to what was to be made from acacia wood and copper alone—without gold, silver, or the fine colored fabrics.

The verse says:

ועשית את המזבח

The definite article indicates that this was the altar everyone expected. All the people of Israel were waiting for the command to build an altar upon which to offer sacrifices, just as all the ancient people had served their deities through offerings. Adam, Noach, Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov had all built altars and offered sacrifices. At Har Sinai as well, Hashem had said:

מזבח אדמה תעשה לי וזבחת עליו…

And Moshe, when he sealed the covenant with Israel, built an altar at the foot of the mountain.

Therefore, the Torah now says:

ועשית את המזבח

Meaning: the altar upon which you will offer sacrifices to Hashem shall be made in the courtyard of the Mishkan, before the entrance of the Ohel Moed.

Although the Kiyor stood between the altar and the entrance curtain—so that Aharon and his sons could wash their hands and feet before entering the sanctuary to burn incense, light the lamps, or arrange the bread—this commandment is not mentioned here. Abarbanel explains that the omission of the Kiyor is intentional and will be clarified later in the answer to the ninth question.

The Torah commands that the altar be made of acacia wood. This refers to the walls of the altar, not its top. The interior was filled with earth, as it says:

מזבח אדמה תעשה לי

If the top had been made of wood, the altar would have burned and been destroyed, since a continual fire was to burn upon it.

It was called a mizbeach because animals were slaughtered upon it and their blood poured out there. The incense altar was also called a mizbeach because it had the same general form, even though animals were not slaughtered upon it.

The Torah states that the altar was to be square:

חמש אמות אורך וחמש אמות רוחב

Five cubits long and five cubits wide. This size was sufficient for offering a single bull. It was not made larger so that it would not be too heavy to carry. For this reason, when King Shlomo later built the Beis HaMikdash, he made a much larger altar in order to accommodate the increased number of offerings.

The height of the altar was:

שלש אמות קומתו

Three cubits high. This height corresponded roughly to the stature of a person, making it convenient to perform the service. There was certainly a ramp (כבש) for ascending the altar, even though it is not mentioned explicitly here.

The Torah commands:

ועשית קרנותיו על ארבע פנותיו

Four horns were to be made at its four corners. They were called “horns” because they projected upward like horns. They were hollow inside so that the blood poured into them would descend through the interior of the altar and flow down into the ground, disappearing from sight.

The verse states:

ממנו תהיינה קרנותיו

This means the horns were to be made from the altar itself, not attached separately. They were to rise directly from its corners, neither protruding outward nor inward, but standing straight upon the corners.

The Torah then commands:

וצפית אותו נחשת

The altar was to be overlaid with copper. However, the copper covering was not uniform throughout. From the midpoint upward, it was made in the form of a mesh, as the Torah later explains.

The Torah lists the altar’s utensils:

ועשית סירותיו…

The “sirot” were pots used to collect the ashes when they accumulated.

The phrase:

לדשנו

Means “for its ashes,” not that the ashes themselves act. The term refers to the ashes produced by the fire.

ויעיו

These were shovels used to gather the ashes into one place.

ומזרקותיו

These were bowls used to receive the blood for sprinkling.

ומזלגותיו

These were forks used to turn over the limbs of the offerings so they would burn properly.

ומחתותיו

These were firepans used to manage and arrange the burning coals.

The Torah concludes:

לכל כליו תעשה נחשת

All the utensils of the altar, both those mentioned and those not specified, were to be made of copper—not silver or gold.

The Torah then commands:

ועשית לו מכבר מעשה רשת

A mesh grating of copper was to be made around the altar, from its midpoint upward to just beneath the ledge known as the כרכוב.

Four copper rings were placed at the four corners of this mesh.

The Torah states:

ונתת אותה תחת כרכוב המזבח

The mesh extended upward to just beneath the ledge at the top of the altar, and downward to the midpoint of the altar’s height.

Since the altar was three cubits tall, the mesh covered the upper one and a half cubits. Its total length encircled all four sides of the altar.

Some commentators said the mesh was only for decoration, but Abarbanel explains that it also served a practical purpose. If the copper covering were solid throughout, the altar would be extremely heavy and difficult to carry. The mesh design reduced the amount of copper needed, making the altar lighter and easier to transport.

However, the mesh only extended halfway down the altar. The lower half was solid copper, because the interior was filled with earth. The weight of the earth pressed downward, and if the entire structure had been mesh, it would not have supported the weight. The solid copper lower half provided the necessary strength.

The ledge (כרכוב) at the top of the altar prevented burning materials from falling onto the sides of the altar.

In the symbolic interpretation, the altar’s copper covering alludes to the word השחתה—destruction—hinting at death and the inevitable decay that overtakes all physical beings.

This altar was quite small in size, but this was intentional so that it could be carried on the shoulders of men during the journeys. For this reason, when King Shlomo built the Temple, he constructed a much larger altar—thirty cubits by thirty cubits, and ten cubits high. That altar required a ramp and a base so that the Kohen could walk around its corners.

Here, however, the Torah does not mention the ramp or the base, because the altar was small and portable. Abarbanel adds that there is also a deeper symbolic reason for this, which he will explain later in Parshas Tetzaveh.

The Torah commands that poles be made to carry the altar. These poles were made of acacia wood and overlaid with copper, since the altar and its poles shared the same symbolic meaning.

The Torah states:

נבוב לוחות תעשה אותו

This means the altar was hollow within, not a solid block of wood. As the Targum explains, it was a hollow structure of boards.

The verse concludes:

כאשר הראה אותך בהר כן יעשו

Just as Hashem had shown Moshe on the mountain, so the altar was to be made.

Abarbanel then notes that this instruction—“as you were shown on the mountain”—appears four times in the commands of the Mishkan. He examines why it appears in some places and not others.

At the beginning of the section, the Torah states generally:

ככל אשר אני מראה אותך את תבנית המשכן ואת תבנית כל כליו וכן תעשו

This general instruction should have sufficed for everything.

However, the phrase is repeated in certain places:

• With the Menorah
• At the conclusion of the Mishkan’s structure
• Here, with the copper altar

But it is not repeated for the Aron, the Shulchan, the Paroches, the Masach, the courtyard, or the priestly garments.

Abarbanel explains that this repetition occurs only where the design was difficult to imagine or describe. In such cases, Moshe needed a clear visual model to show the craftsmen.

This applied especially to:

• The Menorah, whose form was difficult to grasp
• The Mishkan’s coverings, boards, and structural elements
• The outer altar, with its mesh, ledge, and other complex features

In these cases, Moshe was told to follow the exact form shown to him on the mountain.

For the simpler vessels, whose shapes were easy to understand, this repetition was unnecessary, since the initial general command already covered them.

With this explanation, Abarbanel concludes this section and resolves the seventh question he had posed earlier.

27:9 — וְעָשִׂ֕יתָ אֵ֖ת חֲצַ֣ר הַמִּשְׁכָּ֑ן לִפְאַ֣ת נֶֽגֶב־תֵּ֠ימָ֠נָה קְלָעִ֨ים לֶחָצֵ֜ר שֵׁ֣שׁ מׇשְׁזָ֗ר מֵאָ֤ה בָֽאַמָּה֙ אֹ֔רֶךְ לַפֵּאָ֖ה הָאֶחָֽת׃

Abarbanel’s breaks up his commentary on 27:9 into 3 parts:

Part 1 — Architectural Description of the Courtyard

• Construction of the courtyard curtains
• Linen material (no techeiles, argaman, etc.)
• Orientation of the Mishkan
• South, north, west, and east sides
• Pillars, sockets, spacing
• Gate dimensions and materials
• Overall measurements of the courtyard
• Placement of the Mishkan inside it

(This is the technical, structural explanation.)

Part 2 — Symbolic Meaning of the Courtyard

• Copper sockets and their meaning
• Silver hooks and bands
• Symbolism of physical vs. eternal existence
• Linen curtains representing mortality
• Gate symbolism: honor for the righteous
• Symbolism of:
  
  • 100 cubits length
  • 20 pillars
  • 50 cubit width

(This is the philosophical-symbolic section.)

Part 3 — Why the Torah’s Command Order Is “Out of Sequence”

• Abarbanel’s ninth question
• Why the Torah does not command in structural order
• Educational symbolism in the sequence:
  
  • Aron first → Torah as life’s purpose
  • Shulchan & Menorah → blessings from Torah
  • Mishkan structure → worldly pursuits
  • Paroches → separation from Torah
  • Mizbeach → death and decay
  • Courtyard → lowest level of existence
• Transition into Tetzaveh:
  
  • Oil → correct beliefs
  • Aharon → teachers of truth
  • Incense altar → eternal soul

(This is a long philosophical synthesis explaining the entire section of Terumah–Tetzaveh.)

Part 1 — Architectural Description of the Courtyard

ועשית את חצר המשכן וגו׳.

After commanding the construction of the Mizbeach HaOlah, the Torah now turns to the courtyard that surrounded the Mishkan.

Abarbanel explains that the courtyard was enclosed by curtains made of:

שש משזר — fine twisted linen

Unlike the inner curtains of the Mishkan, these did not contain techeiles, argaman, or tolaas shani. They were made only of white linen.

The Mishkan was positioned with its entrance facing east, and the courtyard surrounded it on all four sides.

The Torah describes the southern side first:

לפאת נגב תימנה…

This side measured one hundred cubits in length. Along this side stood twenty pillars.

Each pillar was set into a socket made of copper. The hooks of the pillars, however, were made of silver. Likewise, the bands that encircled the pillars were made of silver.

The same arrangement was repeated on the northern side:

וכן לפאת צפון…

This side also measured one hundred cubits in length and had twenty pillars, each with copper sockets and silver hooks and bands.

The Torah then describes the western side:

ורחב החצר לפאת ים…

The width of the courtyard on the west was fifty cubits. Along this side stood ten pillars, each set into copper sockets, with silver hooks and bands.

The eastern side, which contained the entrance to the courtyard, was also fifty cubits wide. However, this side was divided into three sections.

On the southern side of the entrance:

וחמש עשרה אמה קלעים…

There were fifteen cubits of linen curtains, supported by three pillars.

On the northern side of the entrance, there were also:

וחמש עשרה אמה קלעים…

Another fifteen cubits of curtains, supported by three pillars.

Between these two sections stood the entrance gate itself:

ולשער החצר מסך…

The entrance curtain measured twenty cubits in width. It was made of:

• Techeiles
• Argaman
• Tolaas shani
• Fine twisted linen

Unlike the other courtyard curtains, which were plain white linen, the entrance curtain was multicolored and embroidered. It was supported by four pillars, each set into copper sockets.

Thus, the eastern side consisted of:

• Fifteen cubits of curtains on the south
• A twenty-cubit entrance curtain in the center
• Fifteen cubits of curtains on the north

Together, these formed the full fifty-cubit width of the courtyard.

All the pillars of the courtyard shared the same basic construction:

• Sockets made of copper
• Hooks made of silver
• Bands made of silver

The Torah concludes:

אורך החצר מאה באמה
ורחב חמשים בחמשים
וקמה חמש אמות

The courtyard measured:

• One hundred cubits in length (east to west)
• Fifty cubits in width (north to south)
• Five cubits in height

The curtains were five cubits tall, forming the enclosure around the courtyard.

The Mishkan itself stood within this courtyard. It was placed in the western portion of the courtyard, leaving open space in front of it toward the east, where the altar stood and where the service was performed.

In this way, the courtyard surrounded the Mishkan, forming a sacred enclosure that separated the holy service from the outside world.

Part 2 — Symbolic Meaning of the Courtyard

After describing the structure and measurements of the courtyard, Abarbanel turns to its symbolic meaning.

He explains that the materials used in the courtyard—copper sockets, silver hooks, and linen curtains—were not arbitrary. Each element alludes to a deeper idea about the nature of the physical world and human existence.

The pillars of the courtyard stood upon:

אדני נחשת — copper sockets

Copper, in Abarbanel’s symbolic system, represents the material world, which is subject to decay and destruction. The outer altar, also made of copper, symbolized death and the destruction of physical existence. Similarly, the copper sockets of the courtyard represent the foundation of human life in the physical world, which is inherently transient.

However, the hooks and bands of the pillars were made of:

כסף — silver

Silver symbolizes permanence and enduring value. It represents the higher, more lasting aspects of existence—spiritual truth, moral virtue, and the eternal soul.

Thus, each pillar combined:

• A copper base — representing the physical, perishable world
• Silver hooks and bands — representing what is lasting and elevated

This teaches that although human existence is rooted in a material and mortal world, it is bound together and uplifted by spiritual and eternal values.

The curtains themselves were made of:

שש — fine white linen

Linen, in its simple white form, represents the natural state of the physical world. Unlike the inner curtains of the Mishkan, which were richly colored and adorned with keruvim, the courtyard curtains were plain. This reflects the outer world, which lacks the spiritual refinement and sanctity of the inner sanctuary.

Abarbanel explains that the courtyard represents the world of human activity—the realm of physical existence, struggle, and moral choice. It is the outermost domain of the Mishkan, corresponding to the lowest level of existence.

He then explains the symbolism of the entrance gate.

The gate curtain was made of:

• Techeiles
• Argaman
• Tolaas shani
• Fine linen

These are the same refined materials used in the inner sanctuary. Abarbanel explains that this signifies that even in the outer world, there is an entry point into holiness. The gate represents the path through which a person may enter into a higher spiritual life.

Those who seek closeness to Hashem must pass through this gate, leaving behind the plain outer world and entering into the sanctified space within.

Abarbanel then turns to the symbolic meaning of the courtyard’s measurements.

The courtyard measured:

• One hundred cubits in length
• Fifty cubits in width

Along the length stood twenty pillars, and along the width stood ten.

He explains that the number one hundred represents completeness and perfection in the realm of action. Human life in the physical world is bound by limits, and the number one hundred symbolizes the full measure of worldly attainment.

The number fifty represents a midpoint or transition. It is a number associated with elevation beyond the ordinary, as seen in the counting of the Omer, which culminates in the fiftieth day, Shavuos.

The twenty pillars along the length correspond to the divisions of human life and activity within the physical world. They represent the structured stages and components of human existence.

The ten pillars along the width represent completeness in another dimension. The number ten is associated with perfection and totality, as seen in the Ten Commandments and other foundational structures.

Through these measurements, the courtyard symbolizes the structured, limited, and transitional nature of human life in the physical world.

In summary, the courtyard represents the lowest level in the symbolic hierarchy of the Mishkan:

• Its copper foundations represent the mortal, physical world.
• Its linen curtains represent the plainness of material existence.
• Its silver elements represent the enduring spiritual values that uplift human life.
• Its gate represents the path from the outer world into the realm of holiness.
• Its measurements symbolize the structure and limits of human existence.

Thus, the courtyard stands as a symbolic representation of the human condition: rooted in a transient world, yet given a path toward sanctity and eternal life.

Part 3 — The Ninth Question: Why the Torah’s Command Order Is Not Structural

After completing the architectural and symbolic explanations of the courtyard, Abarbanel turns to the ninth question he had posed at the beginning of the parsha.

The question was:
Why does the Torah not present the commands of the Mishkan in a clear structural order? One would expect the Torah to describe the structure first, and only afterward the vessels placed within it. Instead, the Torah begins with the Aron, then the Shulchan and Menorah, and only later turns to the Mishkan itself and the outer altar.

Abarbanel explains that this order is deliberate and deeply meaningful. The Torah does not follow the order of physical construction, but rather the order of spiritual and philosophical significance.

First, the Torah commands the Aron.
This is because the Aron represents the Torah itself, which is the ultimate purpose of human life. Just as the Aron stood in the Kodesh HaKodashim, the innermost chamber, so too the Torah stands at the center of existence. It is the ultimate goal toward which everything else is directed.

Next, the Torah commands the Shulchan and the Menorah.
These represent the blessings that come as a result of the Torah.

• The Shulchan represents material prosperity and honor.
• The Menorah represents wisdom and intellectual illumination.

These are the benefits that flow from devotion to the Torah.

After these, the Torah commands the structure of the Mishkan.
This represents the broader framework of worldly life—the environment in which a person lives and acts. It symbolizes the external aspects of existence that surround and support the pursuit of Torah.

Then comes the Paroches.
The Paroches separates the Kodesh from the Kodesh HaKodashim. Symbolically, it represents the barrier that stands between a person and the highest level of spiritual attainment. It reflects the distance that exists between ordinary life and the ultimate closeness to Hashem.

Next, the Torah commands the Mizbeach HaOlah.
This altar, made of copper, represents death and the destruction of the physical body. All material existence ultimately ends in decay. The altar, upon which animals were consumed by fire, symbolizes this inevitable end.

Finally, the Torah commands the courtyard.
The courtyard represents the outermost level of existence—the physical world in which people live, act, and struggle. It is the lowest level in the hierarchy, corresponding to the realm of material life.

In this way, the Torah’s order follows a descending spiritual sequence:

1. The Aron — the Torah, the ultimate purpose of life.
2. The Shulchan and Menorah — the blessings of wealth and wisdom.
3. The Mishkan structure — the framework of worldly existence.
4. The Paroches — the barrier between ordinary life and ultimate sanctity.
5. The Mizbeach — death and the destruction of the body.
6. The Courtyard — the material world.

Abarbanel then explains how the next parsha, Tetzaveh, continues this philosophical progression.

The command of the oil for the Menorah represents correct beliefs and proper understanding. Just as the oil fuels the light, correct beliefs fuel spiritual illumination.

The command regarding Aharon and his sons represents the teachers of truth. The Kohanim are those who guide the people in the service of Hashem and instruct them in the ways of Torah.

Finally, the command of the incense altar represents the eternal soul. The rising smoke of the incense symbolizes the ascent of the soul after death, when it is freed from the physical body and returns to the spiritual realm.

Thus, the sequence of the commands in Terumah and Tetzaveh forms a complete philosophical system:

• The Torah as the ultimate goal
• The blessings that flow from it
• The structure of worldly life
• The barriers to spiritual ascent
• The mortality of the body
• The physical world
• Correct belief
• Spiritual teachers
• The eternal soul

With this explanation, Abarbanel resolves the ninth question he posed at the beginning of the parsha.

Chapter 27 Summary

Chapter 27 turns to the outer altar and the courtyard. Abarbanel explains that the Mizbeach HaOlah was the altar expected by the people, following the long tradition of sacrificial worship from the time of Adam, Noach, and the Avos. It was made of acacia wood and copper, symbolizing the mortal and perishable nature of the physical world.

He then describes the courtyard that surrounded the Mishkan. Its linen curtains, copper sockets, and silver hooks carry symbolic meaning. The copper foundations represent the material world and its decay, while the silver elements represent the enduring spiritual values that uplift human life. The entrance curtain, made of refined materials, symbolizes the path from the physical world into holiness.

Abarbanel concludes the chapter by addressing his ninth question: why the Torah’s commands are not presented in structural order. He explains that the sequence follows a descending spiritual hierarchy. The Aron represents the Torah, the ultimate goal. The Shulchan and Menorah represent the blessings of wealth and wisdom. The Mishkan structure represents worldly life. The Paroches represents the barrier to spiritual attainment. The Mizbeach represents death and decay. The courtyard represents the material world. The following parsha, Tetzaveh, then completes the system with correct belief, spiritual leadership, and the eternal soul.

Summary of Abarbanel on Parshas Terumah

Abarbanel’s commentary on Parshas Terumah presents the Mishkan as a complete philosophical model of existence. He begins with deep theological questions about the nature of the Divine dwelling and the meaning of the sanctuary. He surveys symbolic and philosophical interpretations, develops his own system, and ultimately returns to the plain meaning of the text.

In his reading, the Mishkan is not only a physical structure but a symbolic map of human life. At its center stands the Aron, representing the Torah as the ultimate purpose of existence. Surrounding it are the vessels and structures that represent wisdom, prosperity, worldly life, mortality, and the material world. The order of the commands reflects this descending spiritual hierarchy, rather than the sequence of construction.

When combined with the commands of Parshas Tetzaveh, the Mishkan becomes a complete system: the Torah as life’s goal, the blessings that flow from it, the structure of worldly existence, the barriers to spiritual ascent, the mortality of the body, the physical world, correct belief, spiritual teachers, and the eternal soul. In this way, the Mishkan serves as both a sanctuary and a philosophical model of the human journey toward closeness with Hashem.

📖 Source

• Abarbanel on Terumah: 25:1-27:9

Rav Avigdor Miller on Parshas Terumah — Commentary

Introduction to Rav Avigdor Miller on Parshas Terumah

Parshas Terumah introduces one of the most remarkable commands in the Torah: the instruction to build a sanctuary for the Creator of the universe. Until this point, the Torah’s narrative has revolved around redemption from Mitzrayim, the revelation at Har Sinai, and the establishment of the covenant. Now, the Torah turns to the construction of a physical structure—boards, sockets, coverings, vessels, and measurements. At first glance, these chapters appear technical and architectural. But in the teachings of Rav Avigdor Miller, they emerge as a profound program for shaping the Jewish mind and soul.

The Torah declares:

וְעָשׂוּ לִי מִקְדָּשׁ וְשָׁכַנְתִּי בְּתוֹכָם
“And they shall make for Me a sanctuary, and I shall dwell in their midst” (שמות כ״ה:ח׳).

Rav Miller emphasizes that this statement contains an idea so astonishing that it deserves deep reflection. The Creator, whose glory fills the heavens and the earth, announces that He will dwell among the Jewish people in a structure made of wood, cloth, and metal. The Mishkan is not merely a place of prayer or ritual; it is the dwelling place of the Shechinah, the center of Divine Presence among the nation.

Yet in Rav Miller’s approach, this idea does not end with the national sanctuary. The Mishkan is not only a structure in the desert; it is a model for the human being. The command that Hashem will dwell “among them” is understood to mean not only in the midst of the camp, but within each individual. The sanctuary in the center of the nation reflects the sanctuary that must be built inside every Jewish heart.

From this starting point, Rav Miller develops a broad and integrated vision of the Mishkan. Each vessel, each command, and each symbolic detail is not only part of a sacred building, but part of a system designed to educate the Jewish people in the purpose of life. The Mikdash becomes a בית התודה—a House of Thanksgiving—where the entire service is meant to cultivate gratitude to Hashem for the endless gifts of existence.

The teachings of Rav Miller on Parshas Terumah therefore form a coherent progression:

• First, the astonishing reality that the Shechinah dwells among the Jewish nation.
• Then, the realization that the Mishkan exists to train the people in gratitude.
• From there, the recognition that each Jew is himself a living sanctuary.
• The keruvim in the form of children teach the power of youthful idealism and the energy of early spiritual growth.
• The aron, plated with gold inside and out, teaches that external behavior shapes internal character.
• And the wealth brought from Mitzrayim demonstrates that material success exists only as a tool for avodas Hashem.

In this way, the Mishkan becomes far more than a structure. It becomes a blueprint for the אדם השלם—the perfected human being. It teaches that the purpose of life is not wealth, status, or external accomplishment, but self-perfection, gratitude, awareness of Hashem, and the sanctification of every aspect of one’s existence.

What begins as a command to build a sanctuary of gold and wood in the wilderness becomes, in Rav Miller’s teachings, a lifelong program for building a sanctuary of thought, character, gratitude, and holiness within the human soul.

Part I — The Shechinah Among Yisroel

At the heart of Parshas Terumah stands one of the most astonishing declarations in the entire Torah:

וְעָשׂוּ לִי מִקְדָּשׁ וְשָׁכַנְתִּי בְּתוֹכָם
“And they shall make for Me a sanctuary, and I shall dwell in their midst” (שמות כ״ה:ח׳).

Rav Avigdor Miller explains that this statement is not poetic or symbolic language. It is a literal and historical reality. The Mishkan was the place where the Shechinah rested among the Jewish people. Although Hashem fills the heavens and the earth, the Torah teaches that there is a concept of a concentrated Divine Presence, a special resting of the Shechinah, and that presence was found among the nation of Yisroel.

This idea is so startling that even Moshe Rabbeinu was amazed. Chazal describe that when Moshe heard the command to build a sanctuary, he wondered: how could the Infinite One, whose glory fills all existence, dwell in a small structure of wood and fabric? The Mishkan was not a palace of stone or a monument of grandeur. It was a portable structure, made of boards, sockets, and coverings. And yet Hashem declared that He would dwell there.

The lesson is that the ways of Hashem are beyond human logic. What seems impossible or incomprehensible to man is entirely natural in the Divine plan. Hashem chose this nation, and He chose to dwell among them. That choice itself is the greatest expression of the uniqueness and greatness of the Jewish people.

Rav Miller asks us to imagine standing on a hill overlooking the camp of Yisroel in the wilderness. Thousands of tents are spread out in orderly formation, each shevet in its proper place. A guide might point out the important figures who lived there:

• The tents of the leaders of the tribes
• The dwelling of Betzalel, the master craftsman of the Mishkan
• The home of Aharon Hakohen
• The tent of Moshe Rabbeinu

And then he would point to the center of the camp and say:
“That tent in the middle—that’s where the Creator of the universe lives.”

To an outsider, such a statement might sound impossible. The prophet says:

הַשָּׁמַיִם כִּסְאִי וְהָאָרֶץ הֲדוֹם רַגְלָי
“The heavens are My throne and the earth is My footstool” (ישעיהו ס״ו:א׳).

How could such a Being dwell in a small sanctuary? But the answer is simple: because He chose to. The Mishkan was not a human attempt to contain the Divine. It was a Divine command, a place chosen by Hashem as the center of His Presence among His people.

For the nations of the world, such an idea might be distant or abstract. But for the Jewish people, the Mishkan was a source of immense pride and inspiration. They lived with the awareness that Hashem was in their midst.

Even without the Mishkan, they could take pride in the great individuals among them. They lived near Aharon Hakohen, the man described by the prophet as one who walked with Hashem in peace and uprightness, and who brought many back from sin. Aharon was known as:

• אוהב שלום — a lover of peace
• רודף שלום — a pursuer of peace
• אוהב את הבריות ומקרבן לתורה — one who loved people and brought them closer to Torah

To live in the same camp as such people was already a source of greatness. But how much greater was the realization that the Creator Himself dwelled among them.

Rav Miller illustrates this with a simple comparison. If someone can say that a famous artist, a brilliant scientist, or a renowned scholar lives in his neighborhood, it becomes a point of pride. People speak about it. Property values rise. The area gains prestige.

How much more so when the Jewish people could say that Hashem Himself dwelled in their camp.

This awareness was not meant to be an abstract theological concept. It was meant to shape the daily consciousness of the nation. Every Jew knew that in the center of the camp stood the Mishkan—the dwelling place of the Shechinah. Every action, every conversation, and every decision took place in the presence of the Divine.

The Mishkan therefore established a new reality for the Jewish people. They were no longer just a nation that had witnessed miracles or received the Torah. They were now a nation among whom Hashem lived. The Shechinah was not distant. It was in their midst.

This idea forms the foundation of all the teachings of Parshas Terumah. Before we speak about gratitude, self-perfection, youth, character, or wealth, we must first understand this central truth: the Jewish people lived with the Creator as their neighbor.

Part I Summary — The National Home of the Shechinah

Part I establishes the foundation of Rav Miller’s teachings on Terumah:

• The Mishkan was the dwelling place of the Shechinah among the Jewish people.
• The idea that Hashem lived in the camp was meant to inspire pride, awareness, and holiness.
• Even Moshe Rabbeinu was astonished by the concept, showing how profound it is.
• The Mishkan transformed the Jewish nation into a people who lived constantly in the presence of the Divine.

This awareness becomes the starting point for everything that follows. Once the nation understands that Hashem dwells among them, the Mishkan can begin to teach its deeper lessons—gratitude, self-perfection, and the sanctification of every aspect of life.

Part II — The Mishkan as the House of Gratitude

After establishing that the Shechinah dwells among the Jewish people, Rav Avigdor Miller turns to the next great lesson of the Mishkan: its purpose as a בית התודה, a House of Thanksgiving. The sanctuary was not only a place where Hashem’s Presence rested; it was a place designed to train the Jewish people in the central avodah of life—gratitude.

The very structure and service of the Mishkan were meant to cultivate a constant awareness of the kindness of Hashem. The offerings, the vessels, the arrangement of the sanctuary, and the daily routines were not merely rituals. They were educational tools, designed to impress upon the nation that everything they possessed came from Hashem.

One of the key symbols of this idea was the Shulchan, the Table in the Mishkan, upon which the לחם הפנים, the Showbread, was placed continually. Bread is the universal symbol of sustenance. It represents life itself, the daily nourishment that keeps a person alive. By placing bread in the sanctuary, the Torah was teaching that all sustenance comes from Hashem, and that the proper response to life is gratitude.

The Mikdash therefore functioned as a constant reminder that existence itself is a gift. Every breath, every meal, every moment of health and comfort is an expression of Divine kindness. The sanctuary stood as a public declaration that the purpose of life is not merely to exist, but to recognize the goodness of the Creator.

Rav Miller explains that the entire avodah of the Beis Hamikdash was built on this foundation. When a person brought a korban, he was not merely performing a ritual act. He was expressing awareness. He was acknowledging that his life, his possessions, and his success all came from Hashem. The act of offering something back was a declaration of gratitude.

This idea is reflected in the words of Dovid Hamelech, who described the Mikdash as a place of thanksgiving. The sanctuary was where a person learned to recognize the endless kindness that surrounds him. It was a בית התודה, a House of Thanksgiving, where gratitude was the central theme of all service.

The Jewish people, who had just left Mitzrayim, were surrounded by miracles. They had witnessed the plagues, the splitting of the sea, the giving of the Torah, and the daily provision of manna. The Mishkan was meant to preserve that awareness. Even after the open miracles would fade into the background of daily life, the sanctuary would stand as a permanent reminder of Hashem’s kindness.

The constant presence of bread on the Shulchan symbolized that Hashem continually provides for His people. Food does not appear by accident. The world is designed with systems that sustain life. Rain falls, crops grow, animals reproduce, and the human body is able to digest and benefit from nourishment. All of this is the result of Divine wisdom and kindness.

The Mishkan trained the nation to look at these ordinary processes and see the hand of Hashem. Instead of taking life for granted, the Jew was meant to live with a sense of wonder and appreciation.

Rav Miller emphasizes that gratitude is not a side concept in Judaism. It is the foundation of all avodas Hashem. A person who recognizes the goodness of Hashem naturally comes to love Him, to serve Him, and to live in accordance with His will. Without gratitude, religion becomes mechanical. With gratitude, it becomes alive and personal.

The Mishkan therefore served as a national school of awareness. Every aspect of its service taught one lesson: you live in a world of kindness, and your response must be thanksgiving.

This idea also explains why the Jewish people were commanded to donate materials for the Mishkan. Gold, silver, copper, fabrics, and precious stones were all contributed by the nation. These donations were not merely for construction. They were acts of gratitude. The people were giving back to Hashem from the wealth He had given them.

The Mishkan was built from the gifts of the people, and it existed to remind them that everything they possessed was a gift from Hashem. In this way, the sanctuary itself became a physical expression of gratitude.

The lesson extends beyond the desert. Every Jew is meant to live with this awareness. The world itself is a Mishkan of sorts, a place filled with signs of Hashem’s kindness. Food, health, family, opportunities, and even the ability to think and speak are all expressions of His generosity.

The Mishkan taught the nation to look at life and say: thank You.

Part II Summary — The Mikdash as a School of Gratitude

Part II reveals the second major lesson of Rav Miller’s teachings on Terumah:

• The Mishkan functioned as a בית התודה, a House of Thanksgiving.
• The Shulchan and the constant bread symbolized Hashem’s continual provision.
• The korbanos were expressions of awareness and gratitude.
• The donations for the Mishkan were acts of thanksgiving from the people.
• The central purpose of the sanctuary was to train the nation to recognize the kindness of Hashem.

Through the Mishkan, the Jewish people learned that the foundation of avodas Hashem is gratitude. Once a person recognizes the goodness that surrounds him, he is ready to become a sanctuary himself.

Part III — The Jew as a Living Sanctuary

After teaching that the Shechinah dwells among the nation and that the Mishkan functions as a House of Gratitude, Rav Avigdor Miller moves to an even deeper idea: the sanctuary is not only a structure in the desert. The ultimate dwelling place of the Shechinah is the Jewish people themselves.

The Torah declares:

וְעָשׂוּ לִי מִקְדָּשׁ וְשָׁכַנְתִּי בְּתוֹכָם
“And they shall make for Me a sanctuary, and I shall dwell among them” (שמות כ״ה:ח׳).

Rav Miller emphasizes the precise wording of the verse. It does not say, “I will dwell in it,” referring to the Mishkan. It says, “I will dwell among them.” The implication is that the true purpose of the Mishkan is not only that Hashem should reside in a structure, but that He should dwell within the Jewish people themselves.

The sanctuary in the center of the camp was therefore a model. It represented a greater truth: every Jew is meant to become a dwelling place for the Divine Presence.

This idea sheds new light on the nature of the Jewish people. The Torah does not view a Jew as merely a physical being who performs religious actions. A Jew is a sacred entity. His body, his life, and his actions possess a level of holiness that surpasses even the sanctity of the Mishkan itself.

Rav Miller illustrates this concept through the Korban Pesach. When the Jewish people ate the korban in Mitzrayim, they were not simply consuming food. The act of eating the korban was itself an act of avodah. The Jewish body functioned as a mizbeiach, an altar upon which the korban was offered.

In this sense, the Jew himself becomes a sanctuary. His body is the place where the service takes place. His life is the place where the Shechinah can reside.

This perspective also sheds light on the famous argument of Korach. Korach claimed:

כִּי כָל הָעֵדָה כֻּלָּם קְדֹשִׁים
“For the entire congregation is holy.”

Although Korach’s rebellion was wrong, Rav Miller explains that the statement itself contains an element of truth. The Jewish people are indeed holy. Every Jew possesses an intrinsic sanctity. The mistake of Korach was not in recognizing the holiness of the people, but in misunderstanding how that holiness is expressed and structured.

The Mishkan therefore serves as a constant reminder of the holiness of the Jewish individual. Just as the sanctuary is a place where the Shechinah rests, so too each Jew is meant to become a place where the Divine Presence dwells.

This understanding transforms the way a person views his own life. If a Jew is a living sanctuary, then every action he performs carries significance. His speech, his thoughts, his behavior, and his choices all take place within a sacred space—his own being.

The holiness of the Jewish body is not merely symbolic. It has practical implications. What a person eats, how he speaks, how he treats others, and how he conducts himself are all part of the service that takes place within this living sanctuary.

In this way, the Mishkan in the desert becomes a teaching device. It trains the nation to see themselves differently. The sanctuary at the center of the camp is only the beginning. The ultimate sanctuary is the Jewish people themselves.

The presence of the Mishkan taught the nation that Hashem dwelled among them. But the deeper lesson was that Hashem wished to dwell within them. The boards, the curtains, the vessels, and the service were all meant to point toward a greater truth: the human being, especially the Jewish human being, is the true dwelling place of the Shechinah.

This idea also connects to the broader purpose of life. If a Jew is a sanctuary, then his task is to maintain that sanctuary. Just as the Mishkan required careful construction, regular service, and constant attention, so too the human being must build, refine, and maintain his inner world.

The sanctuary of wood and gold was temporary. It traveled through the desert, and later it was replaced by the Beis Hamikdash. But the sanctuary within the Jewish soul is meant to endure throughout a lifetime.

The Mishkan taught the Jewish people to see holiness in physical objects. The next step is to see holiness in themselves.

Part III Summary — The Sanctuary Within the Jew

Part III reveals the deeper purpose of the Mishkan:

• The verse “ושכנתי בתוכם” teaches that Hashem dwells within the Jewish people.
• The Mishkan was a model for the holiness of each individual Jew.
• The Jewish body can function as a mizbeiach, as seen in the eating of the Korban Pesach.
• Every Jew possesses intrinsic holiness, even though Korach misunderstood its implications.
• The true sanctuary of Hashem is the human being who lives with awareness and holiness.

Through this teaching, the Mishkan moves from being a national structure to becoming a personal reality. Each Jew is called upon to build a sanctuary within himself, preparing the way for the next lesson: the role of youth and idealism in shaping a life of spiritual greatness.

Part IV — Youth, Idealism, and Spiritual Formation

After teaching that the Shechinah dwells among the nation and that each Jew is himself a living sanctuary, Rav Avigdor Miller turns to one of the most striking symbols in the Mishkan: the keruvim. These golden figures, placed atop the aron, were fashioned in the form of children. From this image, Rav Miller develops a profound teaching about youth, spiritual energy, and the true purpose of life.

The presence of the keruvim in the form of children is itself a remarkable phenomenon. The Torah strictly prohibits making images and figures, yet in the holiest place in the world, above the aron that contained the luchos, stood two golden forms of children. This apparent contradiction teaches an important lesson. The keruvim were not decorative sculptures. They were symbolic representations of a central truth: youth is the time of the greatest spiritual potential.

Rav Miller explains that the Torah placed the images of children in the holiest place to teach that the ideal human being is one who retains the enthusiasm, purity, and idealism of youth. A child possesses a natural capacity for wonder, excitement, and growth. He has not yet become cynical, hardened, or complacent. The keruvim therefore represent the ideal state of the human soul.

Youth is not merely a stage of life. It is a Divine gift, a period of powerful spiritual energy that must be used wisely. The years of youth are when character is formed, when attitudes are shaped, and when a person’s direction in life is established.

Rav Miller cites the teaching of Rav Yisroel Salanter, who said that most of a person’s character is already formed by the age of eighteen. The foundations of life—habits, attitudes, values, and outlook—are laid during the years of youth. What a person becomes later in life is largely built upon what he constructed during those early years.

This gives youth an immense significance. It is not a time meant only for enjoyment or experimentation. It is a time meant for building the foundations of greatness. The Mishkan teaches this lesson by placing the images of children in the holiest place in the world.

The keruvim also teach that enthusiasm and freshness are not meant to disappear with age. A person is meant to retain the spirit of youth throughout his life. Even as he grows older, he should continue to approach Torah and mitzvos with excitement, curiosity, and idealism.

Rav Miller explains that every creature in the world has a purpose. The bee, for example, lives a short life, but during that time it fulfills its function by producing honey and pollinating flowers. It does not waste its time or question its purpose. It simply carries out the role it was given.

Human beings, however, often lose sight of their purpose. They become distracted by comfort, entertainment, or material pursuits. The Mishkan teaches that the purpose of human life is self-perfection, the development of character, awareness of Hashem, and spiritual growth.

Youth is the time when this work is most powerful. The energy, imagination, and drive of youth are tools given by Hashem so that a person can shape himself into something great. When those years are used properly, they become the foundation for a lifetime of spiritual success.

The keruvim therefore stand as a constant reminder of this truth. They look like children not because the Torah glorifies childishness, but because it glorifies the potential of youth. They represent the ideal human being: one who retains the enthusiasm and purity of youth while dedicating that energy to serving Hashem.

Rav Miller teaches that this lesson applies not only to young people, but to everyone. Even an older person can reclaim the spirit of youth. He can approach his learning, his mitzvos, and his daily life with renewed enthusiasm. The image of the keruvim reminds every Jew to remain spiritually young.

In this way, the Mishkan becomes a guide not only for the structure of a sanctuary or the holiness of the individual, but for the entire arc of a human life. It teaches how to use the energy of youth, how to shape character, and how to pursue the true purpose of existence.

Part IV Summary — The Power of Youth in Building the Soul

Part IV reveals another major teaching of the Mishkan:

• The keruvim were shaped like children to symbolize the spiritual power of youth.
• Youth is the period when character and life direction are formed.
• Rav Yisroel Salanter taught that most of a person’s character is shaped by the age of eighteen.
• The purpose of life is self-perfection, not material success or comfort.
• A person should retain the enthusiasm and idealism of youth throughout his life.

Through the image of the keruvim, the Mishkan teaches that youth is not a trivial stage of life, but the engine of spiritual greatness. The sanctuary is built not only of gold and wood, but of the energy, ideals, and aspirations formed in the early years of life.

Part V — Outer Conduct and Inner Transformation

After teaching that the Mishkan reflects the sanctity of the individual and the formative power of youth, Rav Avigdor Miller turns to one of the most important practical lessons of the sanctuary: the relationship between external behavior and internal character. This teaching is drawn from the structure of the aron, the most sacred vessel in the Mishkan.

The Torah commands that the aron be made of acacia wood and plated with gold both inside and outside:

וְצִפִּיתָ אֹתוֹ זָהָב טָהוֹר מִבַּיִת וּמִחוּץ תְּצַפֶּנּוּ
“And you shall overlay it with pure gold, from within and from without shall you overlay it” (שמות כ״ה:י״א).

Chazal teach that this design is not merely aesthetic. It conveys a moral lesson. The aron represents the heart and mind of the human being, the inner chamber where thoughts, values, and beliefs reside. Just as the aron was covered with gold inside and out, so too a person must strive to have purity both in his inner world and in his external conduct.

Rav Miller explains that the gold on the inside represents the correct attitudes, thoughts, and understanding of Torah. A person must fill his mind with true ideas, with awareness of Hashem, and with the principles of Torah life. His inner world must be refined and elevated.

But the gold on the outside represents behavior. A person’s speech, actions, and outward conduct must also reflect dignity, refinement, and holiness. The Torah does not accept a separation between inner belief and outer action. The ideal is that both should shine with the same purity.

However, Rav Miller points out an important practical truth. Human beings do not always begin with a golden interior. A person may not yet feel inspired. He may not yet possess lofty thoughts or pure intentions. His inner world may still be developing.

The Torah therefore provides a method. Even if the inside is not yet gold, the outside must be. A person should act properly even before he feels properly. He should behave with dignity, speak with refinement, and perform mitzvos with care, even if his heart is not yet fully aligned.

This approach may feel artificial at first. Rav Miller calls this stage “artificial man.” A person behaves in a way that is not yet natural to him. He acts with patience even when he feels angry. He speaks kindly even when he feels irritation. He performs mitzvos with care even when he feels distracted.

But this artificial stage is not hypocrisy. It is training. External conduct has a powerful influence on the inner world. When a person consistently behaves in a certain way, those behaviors begin to shape his character. The actions carve pathways in the mind and heart, gradually transforming the person from the outside in.

Over time, the artificial becomes natural. The gold on the outside begins to penetrate inward, until the inside too becomes golden. The person’s thoughts, attitudes, and emotions align with his actions.

The aron therefore becomes a model for human development. The ideal is gold inside and out, but the path to that ideal begins with the outside. Behavior leads the way, and the heart follows.

Rav Miller also explains that the Mishkan as a whole reflects the structure of the human being. The sanctuary is not only a national institution. It is a model of the human soul and body.

Just as the Mishkan contained different vessels, chambers, and functions, so too the human being is a complex structure with different faculties. The mind, the heart, the senses, and the limbs all serve different roles. The goal is to bring all these elements into harmony, so that the entire person becomes a sanctuary for the Shechinah.

The aron, placed in the innermost chamber, represents the deepest part of the human being: the heart and mind. When that inner chamber is refined, the entire structure becomes holy.

This teaching provides a practical program for self-perfection. A person does not wait until he feels inspired or elevated. He begins with action. He behaves properly, speaks properly, and conducts himself with dignity. Over time, those actions shape his character and transform his inner world.

The Mishkan therefore becomes not only a symbol of holiness, but a method for achieving it. It teaches that the path to inner greatness begins with outer conduct.

Part V Summary — From Artificial Conduct to a Golden Heart

Part V presents one of Rav Miller’s most practical teachings:

• The aron was plated with gold inside and out to symbolize purity of both thought and action.
• The inside represents correct ideas, attitudes, and awareness of Hashem.
• The outside represents proper behavior, speech, and conduct.
• A person may begin with external refinement even if his inner world is not yet elevated.
• External conduct shapes internal character, turning “artificial” behavior into genuine holiness.
• The Mishkan as a whole serves as a model for the structure and refinement of the human being.

Through the lesson of the aron, the Mishkan teaches that the path to inner perfection begins with outer action. By shaping behavior, a person gradually transforms his heart into a golden sanctuary for the Shechinah.

Part VI — Wealth as a כלי for Avodas Hashem

After teaching that the Mishkan reflects the structure of the human soul and that external conduct shapes internal character, Rav Avigdor Miller turns to another major lesson of Parshas Terumah: the meaning of wealth. The materials used to build the Mishkan—gold, silver, copper, fabrics, and precious stones—were not ordinary resources. They were the very treasures that the Jewish people had taken out of Mitzrayim.

The Torah commands:

וְיִקְחוּ לִי תְּרוּמָה
“And they shall take for Me an offering” (שמות כ״ה:ב׳).

The Jewish people had just left slavery with great wealth. After generations of poverty and oppression, they emerged from Mitzrayim laden with gold, silver, and valuable materials. One might assume that this wealth was given to them as compensation, or as a reward for their suffering. But Rav Miller explains that the Torah reveals a very different perspective.

The very first major use of this wealth was not for personal comfort, luxury, or private benefit. It was for the construction of the Mishkan. The gold and silver that they had carried out of Mitzrayim were immediately dedicated to building a sanctuary for Hashem.

This teaches a fundamental principle: wealth is not an end in itself. It is a tool. Material success is not the purpose of life, but a means for achieving the true purpose—avodas Hashem.

The generation that left Mitzrayim is called the דור דעה, the generation of knowledge. They understood this truth instinctively. When they were asked to donate materials for the Mishkan, they responded with enthusiasm. They did not cling to their wealth or treat it as personal property to be guarded. They saw it as an opportunity to serve Hashem.

Their attitude demonstrates the correct Jewish approach to material possessions. Wealth is not meant to inflate the ego or to create a life of indulgence. It is meant to be used for higher purposes: building sanctuaries, supporting Torah, helping others, and increasing avodas Hashem in the world.

Rav Miller connects this idea to a broader principle taught by the Rambam. The Rambam explains that material blessings are not the reward for mitzvos. The true reward for mitzvos is closeness to Hashem and the opportunity to continue serving Him. When a person receives wealth or comfort, it is not a prize. It is a tool that enables him to do more good.

If a person becomes wealthy, the proper question is not, “How can I enjoy this?” but rather, “What does Hashem want from me now? How can I use this to serve Him better?”

The Mishkan teaches this lesson in the clearest possible way. The wealth of the Jewish people was immediately transformed into sacred objects. Gold became the aron, the menorah, and the vessels of the sanctuary. Fabrics became the curtains and coverings of the Mishkan. Precious stones adorned the garments of the kohanim.

In this transformation, material wealth became spiritual wealth. Physical objects were elevated into instruments of holiness.

This lesson applies far beyond the desert. Every person is given certain resources—money, talents, opportunities, and abilities. These are not random or meaningless. They are tools placed in his hands by Hashem.

A person may have wealth, intelligence, influence, or time. Each of these is a form of “gold” taken from Mitzrayim. The question is what he will do with it. Will it be used for self-indulgence, or will it be used to build a Mishkan?

Rav Miller teaches that the correct approach is to see all material success as an opportunity for avodas Hashem. Wealth becomes meaningful only when it is used for a higher purpose.

The Mishkan therefore stands as a permanent lesson in the true function of wealth. It reminds the Jewish people that the treasures of this world are not meant to distract from spiritual life, but to support and enhance it.

The gold of Mitzrayim was not an end. It was the beginning of the Mishkan.

Part VI Summary — Wealth as a Tool for Divine Service

Part VI presents Rav Miller’s teaching on the meaning of material success:

• The wealth taken from Mitzrayim was used to build the Mishkan.
• This shows that wealth is not a reward or an end in itself.
• Material success is a tool for avodas Hashem.
• The דור דעה understood this and donated their possessions willingly.
• The Rambam teaches that material blessings enable greater service, not indulgence.
• Every person’s resources are meant to be used to build a “Mishkan” in his own life.

Through this lesson, the Mishkan teaches that gold and silver have no intrinsic value. Their true worth is revealed only when they are transformed into instruments of holiness and service of Hashem.

Closing Synthesis — The Mishkan as the Blueprint for the Human Soul

In the teachings of Rav Avigdor Miller, Parshas Terumah is not primarily a discussion of architecture, craftsmanship, or sacred vessels. It is a program for life. The Mishkan is presented not merely as a structure in the wilderness, but as a complete system for shaping the Jewish mind, heart, and destiny.

The Torah begins with a declaration that seems almost beyond comprehension:

וְעָשׂוּ לִי מִקְדָּשׁ וְשָׁכַנְתִּי בְּתוֹכָם
“And they shall make for Me a sanctuary, and I shall dwell in their midst.”

This statement forms the foundation of Rav Miller’s entire approach. The Creator of the universe chose to dwell among the Jewish people. The Mishkan stood at the center of the camp as a constant reminder that the nation lived in the presence of the Shechinah. This awareness was meant to shape every aspect of their lives.

From this starting point, the Mishkan becomes a school for the most important lessons of existence.

• First, it teaches that Hashem dwells among the Jewish people. The nation is not alone in the world. They live in the presence of the Divine.
• Second, it teaches gratitude. The Mikdash functions as a בית התודה, a House of Thanksgiving, where the service trains the people to recognize the endless kindness of Hashem.
• Third, it reveals that the true sanctuary is the human being himself. The command that Hashem will dwell “among them” teaches that each Jew is meant to become a dwelling place for the Shechinah.
• Fourth, it highlights the role of youth. The keruvim in the form of children teach that the energy, idealism, and enthusiasm of youth are the engines of spiritual greatness.
• Fifth, it provides a method for self-perfection. The aron plated with gold inside and out teaches that external conduct shapes internal character, transforming artificial behavior into genuine holiness.
• Sixth, it explains the purpose of wealth. The gold and silver taken from Mitzrayim were used to build the Mishkan, demonstrating that material success exists only as a tool for avodas Hashem.

Seen together, these teachings form a complete philosophy of life. The Mishkan is not only a national sanctuary. It is a blueprint for the אדם השלם—the perfected human being.

It teaches:

• Where Hashem dwells
• Why we exist
• How we must live
• What to do with our youth
• How to shape our character
• And how to use our possessions

The sanctuary of boards, gold, and fabric that stood in the desert was temporary. It traveled from place to place and was eventually replaced by the Beis Hamikdash. But the sanctuary that Rav Miller describes is meant to endure forever. It is the sanctuary built within the Jewish soul.

Every Jew is given the materials for this inner Mishkan:

• Awareness of Hashem
• Gratitude for His kindness
• The energy of youth
• The ability to shape character through action
• And the resources of this world

The task of life is to assemble these materials into a dwelling place for the Shechinah.

In this way, Parshas Terumah ceases to be a technical description of a desert sanctuary. It becomes a lifelong guide to building a holy life. The Mishkan in the wilderness becomes the model for the Mishkan within the heart, where the Divine Presence can dwell not only among the people, but within each individual.

📖 Sources

• Toras Avigdor — Terumah — 7 Booklets 5779-5785